[dm-crypt] aes-xts-plain with aes_x86_64 makes my SSD 5x slower than my encrypted HD

Yves-Alexis Perez corsac at debian.org
Mon Jul 23 08:07:37 CEST 2012


On dim., 2012-07-22 at 23:47 +0200, Arno Wagner wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 01:39:29PM -0700, Marc MERLIN wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 09:47:32PM +0200, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> > > > Any suggestions would be appreciated. 
> > > 
> > > I'm using Debian sid (so still at 3.2 kernel), currently using a 256G
> > > Samsung SSD. What I get is:
> 
> SID? That would be "unstable", whit possible assorted problems.

*I* am running SID, not the original reporter. And I have pretty decent
speed, thank you :)
> 
> [...]
> > gandalfthegreat:~# dd if=/dev/mapper/ssdcrypt of=/dev/null bs=1M count=1024 
> > 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 44.3302 s, 24.2 MB/s
> > 
> > atop shows dd isn't really pegging a single core:
> > THR    SYSCPU   USRCPU     RDDSK   WRDSK   ST  EXC   S  CPUNR    CPU  CMD 
> >   1     0.60s    0.01s    226.2M      0K   --    -   D      3     6%  dd
> 
> It would not, as AES-NI (AFAIK) does need very little CPU
> assistance. AES-NI may be the problem though. Can you try with
> the normal AES module? I think unloading the AES-NI module 
> may be enough for that, but I am not sure. 
> 
> Maybe AES-NI needs very long for something it needs to do each 
> sector. Google("aes-ni slow") found at least some indications that
> aes-ni may still have problems.

And I do use aes-ni too.
-- 
Yves-Alexis
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://www.saout.de/pipermail/dm-crypt/attachments/20120723/0075e3cc/attachment-0001.asc>


More information about the dm-crypt mailing list