On Wed, 26 Jan 2011 14:31:55 +0100 Jochen Schulz <m...@well-adjusted.de> wrote:
> Celejar: > > On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 07:58:28 +0100 > >> > >> A single core get's used 100% by the kworker thread. But actually it's > >> not 20MB/s, but 25MB/s while reading (decrypting) and 35MB/s while > >> writing (encrypting). I just tested it again. > > > > So does that mean that your wireless throughput with encryption enabled > > is CPU-bound, and that you'd be getting better throughput with a more > > powerful CPU (or without encryption)? > > No. The numbers I posted were about disk encryption. They were just > meant to illustrate what throughput is possible with AES if it is done > by a comparably slow CPU (Atom D510, 1.66GHz). > > With WPA2/AES you have significantly less throughput (typically <10%) > and, as far as I know, wifi encrpytion is done by the hardware and not > the host CPU. But even if it's done on the host CPU: my numbers show > that you really don't need to care about that very much, as long as your > system isn't older than, say, 6-8 years. > > (Disclaimer: I am unsure whether WPA2 with AES actually performs the > same as LUKS using AES. But my guess is that it's not far off.) Okay - thanks for the clarification. Celejar -- foffl.sourceforge.net - Feeds OFFLine, an offline RSS/Atom aggregator mailmin.sourceforge.net - remote access via secure (OpenPGP) email ssuds.sourceforge.net - A Simple Sudoku Solver and Generator -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110126093738.d566a3d2.cele...@gmail.com
