Hi, On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 3:22 AM, Stefan Monnier <monn...@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote: >> Thanks, I installed your cryptotest suite including your new lukstest >> tool and ran some tests on a Banana Pi tonight. The results were all >> good. After a first successful run of lukstest, I modified the script >> and increased the sample size by a factor of 100 (and the image file, >> too). Even with the increased sample size, I didn't see any errors >> (because of the increased test duration, I ran only 5 iterations, >> though). Tests were done on an Armbian installation with Kernel 4.4.1 >> (with your patch "Add missing state size" on top of it) in order to >> resemble the original reporters conditions more closely. I was >> planning to do tests with 4.4.2 as well, but since all tests succeeded >> so far, I don't think that would change anything. > > [ Just a random shot in the dark from someone who knows nothing about > these things. ] > > My guess is that to reproduce the problem, you need to have maybe the > same intertwined sequence of decryption and disk access (who I have no > idea what kind of disk he's using). > IOW it could be linked to some interference from the disk's interrupts > or something.
I probably know less about these things than you - but I sounds interesting. I will give it another try lathr this week and set up a samba share on that drive to put some stress on the drive while the lukstest is running. Then we should have interrupts from both the SATA controller and the ehternet controller at the same time. Regards, Timo -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "linux-sunxi" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
