Re: comparison of the AF_ALG interface with the /dev/crypto

[Herbert Xu]

Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos <nmav@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Given my benchmarks have no issues, it is not apparent to me why one
> should use AF_ALG instead of cryptodev. I do not know though why AF_ALG
> performs so poor. I'd speculate by blaming it on the usage of the socket
> API and the number of system calls required.

The target usage of AF_ALG is hardware offload devices that cannot
be directly used in user-space, not software crypto on implementations
such as AESNI/Padlock.

Going through the kernel to use something like AESNI/Padlock or
software crypto is insane.

Given the intended target case, your numbers are pretty much
meaningless as cryptodev's performance can be easily beaten
by a pure user-space implementation.

Cheers,
-- 
Email: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/