Hi, Mathias,

On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 06:18 +0800, Mathias Krause wrote:
> All test were run five times in a row using a 256 bit key and doing i/o
> to the block device in chunks of 1MB. The numbers are MB/s.
> 
> x86 (i586 variant):
>         1. run  2. run  3. run  4. run  5. run    mean
> ECB:      93.9    93.9    94.0    93.5    93.8    93.8
> CBC:      84.9    84.8    84.9    84.9    84.8    84.8
> XTS:     108.2   108.3   109.6   108.3   108.9   108.6
> LRW:     105.0   105.0   105.1   105.1   105.1   105.0
> 
> x86 (AES-NI), v3 of the patch:
>         1. run  2. run  3. run  4. run  5. run    mean
> ECB:     124.8   120.8   124.5   120.6   124.5   123.0
> CBC:     112.6   109.6   112.6   110.7   109.4   110.9 
> XTS:     221.6   221.1   220.9   223.5   224.4   222.3
> LRW:     206.2   209.7   207.4   203.7   209.3   207.2
> 
> x86 (AES-NI), v4 of the patch:
>         1. run  2. run  3. run  4. run  5. run    mean
> ECB:     122.5   121.2   121.6   125.7   125.5   123.3
> CBC:     259.5   259.2   261.2   264.0   267.6   262.3 
> XTS:     225.1   230.7   220.6   217.9   216.3   222.1
> LRW:     202.7   202.8   210.6   208.9   202.7   205.5
> 
> Comparing the values for the CBC variant between v3 and v4 of the patch
> shows that porting the CBC variant to x86 more then doubled the
> performance so the little bit ugly #ifdefed code is worth the effort.
> 
> x86-64 (old):
>         1. run  2. run  3. run  4. run  5. run    mean
> ECB:     121.4   120.9   121.1   121.2   120.9   121.1
> CBC:     282.5   286.3   281.5   282.0   294.5   285.3
> XTS:     263.6   260.3   263.0   267.0   264.6   263.7
> LRW:     249.6   249.8   250.5   253.4   252.2   251.1
> 
> x86-64 (new):
>         1. run  2. run  3. run  4. run  5. run    mean
> ECB:     122.1   122.0   122.0   127.0   121.9   123.0
> CBC:     291.2   286.2   295.6   291.4   289.9   290.8
> XTS:     263.3   264.4   264.5   264.2   270.4   265.3
> LRW:     254.9   252.3   253.6   258.2   257.5   255.3
> 
> Comparing the mean values gives us:
> 
> x86:     i586   aes-ni    delta
> ECB:     93.8    123.3   +31.4%

Why the improvement of ECB is so small? I can not understand it. It
should be as big as CBC.

Best Regards,
Huang Ying

> CBC:     84.8    262.3  +209.3%
> LRW:    108.6    222.1  +104.5%
> XTS:    105.0    205.5   +95.7%
> 
> x86-64:   old      new    delta
> ECB:    121.1    123.0    +1.5%
> CBC:    285.3    290.8    +1.9%
> LRW:    263.7    265.3    +0.6%
> XTS:    251.1    255.3    +1.7%
> 
> The improvement for the old vs. the new x86-64 version is not as
> drastically as for the synchronous variant (see the tcrypt tests in the
> previous email), but nevertheless an improvement. The improvement for
> the x86 case, albeit, should be noticeable. It's almost as fast as the
> x86-64 version.
> 
> I'll post the new version of the patch in a follow-up email.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Mathias
> 


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to