er.kernel.org; Ryan Cox
> > ; netdev@vger.kernel.org; da...@davemloft.net; Antoine
> > Tenart ;
> > ebigg...@google.com
> > Subject: Re: Severe performance regression in "net: macsec: preserve
> > ingress frame ordering"
> >
> > <<< External Em
igg...@google.com
> Subject: Re: Severe performance regression in "net: macsec: preserve ingress
> frame ordering"
>
> <<< External Email >>>
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 09:07:26AM +, Van Leeuwen, Pascal wrote:
> > No need to point this out to me as
On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 09:07:26AM +, Van Leeuwen, Pascal wrote:
> No need to point this out to me as we're the number one supplier of inline
> MACsec IP :-)
> In fact, the Microsemi PHY solution you mention is ours, major parts of that
> design were
> even created by these 2 hands here.
Oh,
org; da...@davemloft.net; Antoine
> Tenart ;
> ebigg...@google.com
> Subject: Re: Severe performance regression in "net: macsec: preserve ingress
> frame ordering"
>
> <<< External Email >>>
> > With networking protocols you often also have a r
> With networking protocols you often also have a requirement to minimize
> packet reordering, so I understand it's a careful balance. But it is possible
> to serialize the important stuff and still do the crypto out-of-order, which
> would be really beneficial on _some_ platforms (which have HW cr
oine Tenart
> ; ebigg...@google.com
> Subject: Re: Severe performance regression in "net: macsec: preserve ingress
> frame ordering"
>
> <<< External Email >>>
> 2020-08-10, 12:09:40 -0400, Scott Dial wrote:
> > On 8/10/2020 9:34 AM, Sabrina Dubroca wrote:
&g
2020-08-10, 12:09:40 -0400, Scott Dial wrote:
> On 8/10/2020 9:34 AM, Sabrina Dubroca wrote:
> > [adding the linux-crypto list]
> >
> > 2020-08-06, 23:48:16 -0400, Scott Dial wrote:
> >> On 8/6/2020 5:11 PM, Ryan Cox wrote:
> >>> With 5.7 I get:
> >>> * 9.90 Gb/s with no macsec at all
> >>> * 1.80
On 8/10/2020 9:34 AM, Sabrina Dubroca wrote:
> [adding the linux-crypto list]
>
> 2020-08-06, 23:48:16 -0400, Scott Dial wrote:
>> On 8/6/2020 5:11 PM, Ryan Cox wrote:
>>> With 5.7 I get:
>>> * 9.90 Gb/s with no macsec at all
>>> * 1.80 Gb/s with macsec WITHOUT encryption
>>> * 1.00 Gb/s (sometime
[adding the linux-crypto list]
2020-08-06, 23:48:16 -0400, Scott Dial wrote:
> On 8/6/2020 5:11 PM, Ryan Cox wrote:
> > With 5.7 I get:
> > * 9.90 Gb/s with no macsec at all
> > * 1.80 Gb/s with macsec WITHOUT encryption
> > * 1.00 Gb/s (sometimes, but often less) with macsec WITH encryption
> >
On 8/6/20 9:48 PM, Scott Dial wrote:
The aes-aesni driver is smart enough to use the FPU if it's not busy and
fallback to the CPU otherwise. Unfortunately, the ghash-clmulni driver
does not have that kind of logic in it and only provides an async version,
so we are forced to use the ghash-generic
On 8/6/2020 5:11 PM, Ryan Cox wrote:
> With 5.7 I get:
> * 9.90 Gb/s with no macsec at all
> * 1.80 Gb/s with macsec WITHOUT encryption
> * 1.00 Gb/s (sometimes, but often less) with macsec WITH encryption
>
> With 5.7 but with ab046a5d4be4c90a3952a0eae75617b49c0cb01b reverted, I get:
> * 9.90 Gb/
11 matches
Mail list logo
