linux/crypto/cryptd.c

1153 lines
30 KiB

crypto: cryptd - Per-CPU thread implementation based on kcrypto_wq Original cryptd thread implementation has scalability issue, this patch solve the issue with a per-CPU thread implementation. struct cryptd_queue is defined to be a per-CPU queue, which holds one struct cryptd_cpu_queue for each CPU. In struct cryptd_cpu_queue, a struct crypto_queue holds all requests for the CPU, a struct work_struct is used to run all requests for the CPU. Testing based on dm-crypt on an Intel Core 2 E6400 (two cores) machine shows 19.2% performance gain. The testing script is as follow: -------------------- script begin --------------------------- #!/bin/sh dmc_create() { # Create a crypt device using dmsetup dmsetup create $2 --table "0 `blockdev --getsize $1` crypt cbc(aes-asm)?cryptd?plain:plain babebabebabebabebabebabebabebabe 0 $1 0" } dmsetup remove crypt0 dmsetup remove crypt1 dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram0 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram1 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dmc_create /dev/ram0 crypt0 dmc_create /dev/ram1 crypt1 cat >tr.sh <<EOF #!/bin/sh for n in \$(seq 10); do dd if=/dev/dm-0 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & dd if=/dev/dm-1 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & done wait EOF for n in $(seq 10); do /usr/bin/time sh tr.sh done rm tr.sh -------------------- script end --------------------------- The separator of dm-crypt parameter is changed from "-" to "?", because "-" is used in some cipher driver name too, and cryptds need to specify cipher driver name instead of cipher name. The test result on an Intel Core2 E6400 (two cores) is as follow: without patch: -----------------wo begin -------------------------- 0.04user 0.38system 0:00.39elapsed 107%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6566minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.35system 0:00.35elapsed 121%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6567minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 135%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.36elapsed 119%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6607minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.36system 0:00.35elapsed 120%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.31elapsed 136%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 126%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6597minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.32system 0:00.31elapsed 125%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6571minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 134%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6581minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.38system 0:00.31elapsed 138%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6600minor)pagefaults 0swaps -----------------wo end -------------------------- with patch: ------------------w begin -------------------------- 0.02user 0.31system 0:00.24elapsed 141%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6554minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 127%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6606minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.33system 0:00.26elapsed 155%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6559minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.32system 0:00.26elapsed 151%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.26elapsed 150%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6603minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.36system 0:00.31elapsed 124%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 147%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6586minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.37system 0:00.27elapsed 146%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.36system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6557minor)pagefaults 0swaps ------------------w end -------------------------- The middle value of elapsed time is: wo cryptwq: 0.31 w cryptwq: 0.26 The performance gain is about (0.31-0.26)/0.26 = 0.192. Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
2009-02-19 14:42:19 +08:00
crypto: cryptd - Per-CPU thread implementation based on kcrypto_wq Original cryptd thread implementation has scalability issue, this patch solve the issue with a per-CPU thread implementation. struct cryptd_queue is defined to be a per-CPU queue, which holds one struct cryptd_cpu_queue for each CPU. In struct cryptd_cpu_queue, a struct crypto_queue holds all requests for the CPU, a struct work_struct is used to run all requests for the CPU. Testing based on dm-crypt on an Intel Core 2 E6400 (two cores) machine shows 19.2% performance gain. The testing script is as follow: -------------------- script begin --------------------------- #!/bin/sh dmc_create() { # Create a crypt device using dmsetup dmsetup create $2 --table "0 `blockdev --getsize $1` crypt cbc(aes-asm)?cryptd?plain:plain babebabebabebabebabebabebabebabe 0 $1 0" } dmsetup remove crypt0 dmsetup remove crypt1 dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram0 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram1 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dmc_create /dev/ram0 crypt0 dmc_create /dev/ram1 crypt1 cat >tr.sh <<EOF #!/bin/sh for n in \$(seq 10); do dd if=/dev/dm-0 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & dd if=/dev/dm-1 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & done wait EOF for n in $(seq 10); do /usr/bin/time sh tr.sh done rm tr.sh -------------------- script end --------------------------- The separator of dm-crypt parameter is changed from "-" to "?", because "-" is used in some cipher driver name too, and cryptds need to specify cipher driver name instead of cipher name. The test result on an Intel Core2 E6400 (two cores) is as follow: without patch: -----------------wo begin -------------------------- 0.04user 0.38system 0:00.39elapsed 107%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6566minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.35system 0:00.35elapsed 121%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6567minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 135%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.36elapsed 119%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6607minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.36system 0:00.35elapsed 120%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.31elapsed 136%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 126%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6597minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.32system 0:00.31elapsed 125%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6571minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 134%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6581minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.38system 0:00.31elapsed 138%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6600minor)pagefaults 0swaps -----------------wo end -------------------------- with patch: ------------------w begin -------------------------- 0.02user 0.31system 0:00.24elapsed 141%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6554minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 127%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6606minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.33system 0:00.26elapsed 155%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6559minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.32system 0:00.26elapsed 151%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.26elapsed 150%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6603minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.36system 0:00.31elapsed 124%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 147%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6586minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.37system 0:00.27elapsed 146%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.36system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6557minor)pagefaults 0swaps ------------------w end -------------------------- The middle value of elapsed time is: wo cryptwq: 0.31 w cryptwq: 0.26 The performance gain is about (0.31-0.26)/0.26 = 0.192. Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
2009-02-19 14:42:19 +08:00
crypto: cryptd - Per-CPU thread implementation based on kcrypto_wq Original cryptd thread implementation has scalability issue, this patch solve the issue with a per-CPU thread implementation. struct cryptd_queue is defined to be a per-CPU queue, which holds one struct cryptd_cpu_queue for each CPU. In struct cryptd_cpu_queue, a struct crypto_queue holds all requests for the CPU, a struct work_struct is used to run all requests for the CPU. Testing based on dm-crypt on an Intel Core 2 E6400 (two cores) machine shows 19.2% performance gain. The testing script is as follow: -------------------- script begin --------------------------- #!/bin/sh dmc_create() { # Create a crypt device using dmsetup dmsetup create $2 --table "0 `blockdev --getsize $1` crypt cbc(aes-asm)?cryptd?plain:plain babebabebabebabebabebabebabebabe 0 $1 0" } dmsetup remove crypt0 dmsetup remove crypt1 dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram0 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram1 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dmc_create /dev/ram0 crypt0 dmc_create /dev/ram1 crypt1 cat >tr.sh <<EOF #!/bin/sh for n in \$(seq 10); do dd if=/dev/dm-0 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & dd if=/dev/dm-1 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & done wait EOF for n in $(seq 10); do /usr/bin/time sh tr.sh done rm tr.sh -------------------- script end --------------------------- The separator of dm-crypt parameter is changed from "-" to "?", because "-" is used in some cipher driver name too, and cryptds need to specify cipher driver name instead of cipher name. The test result on an Intel Core2 E6400 (two cores) is as follow: without patch: -----------------wo begin -------------------------- 0.04user 0.38system 0:00.39elapsed 107%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6566minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.35system 0:00.35elapsed 121%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6567minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 135%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.36elapsed 119%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6607minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.36system 0:00.35elapsed 120%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.31elapsed 136%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 126%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6597minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.32system 0:00.31elapsed 125%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6571minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 134%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6581minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.38system 0:00.31elapsed 138%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6600minor)pagefaults 0swaps -----------------wo end -------------------------- with patch: ------------------w begin -------------------------- 0.02user 0.31system 0:00.24elapsed 141%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6554minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 127%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6606minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.33system 0:00.26elapsed 155%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6559minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.32system 0:00.26elapsed 151%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.26elapsed 150%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6603minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.36system 0:00.31elapsed 124%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 147%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6586minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.37system 0:00.27elapsed 146%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.36system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6557minor)pagefaults 0swaps ------------------w end -------------------------- The middle value of elapsed time is: wo cryptwq: 0.31 w cryptwq: 0.26 The performance gain is about (0.31-0.26)/0.26 = 0.192. Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
2009-02-19 14:42:19 +08:00
crypto: cryptd - Per-CPU thread implementation based on kcrypto_wq Original cryptd thread implementation has scalability issue, this patch solve the issue with a per-CPU thread implementation. struct cryptd_queue is defined to be a per-CPU queue, which holds one struct cryptd_cpu_queue for each CPU. In struct cryptd_cpu_queue, a struct crypto_queue holds all requests for the CPU, a struct work_struct is used to run all requests for the CPU. Testing based on dm-crypt on an Intel Core 2 E6400 (two cores) machine shows 19.2% performance gain. The testing script is as follow: -------------------- script begin --------------------------- #!/bin/sh dmc_create() { # Create a crypt device using dmsetup dmsetup create $2 --table "0 `blockdev --getsize $1` crypt cbc(aes-asm)?cryptd?plain:plain babebabebabebabebabebabebabebabe 0 $1 0" } dmsetup remove crypt0 dmsetup remove crypt1 dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram0 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram1 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dmc_create /dev/ram0 crypt0 dmc_create /dev/ram1 crypt1 cat >tr.sh <<EOF #!/bin/sh for n in \$(seq 10); do dd if=/dev/dm-0 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & dd if=/dev/dm-1 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & done wait EOF for n in $(seq 10); do /usr/bin/time sh tr.sh done rm tr.sh -------------------- script end --------------------------- The separator of dm-crypt parameter is changed from "-" to "?", because "-" is used in some cipher driver name too, and cryptds need to specify cipher driver name instead of cipher name. The test result on an Intel Core2 E6400 (two cores) is as follow: without patch: -----------------wo begin -------------------------- 0.04user 0.38system 0:00.39elapsed 107%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6566minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.35system 0:00.35elapsed 121%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6567minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 135%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.36elapsed 119%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6607minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.36system 0:00.35elapsed 120%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.31elapsed 136%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 126%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6597minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.32system 0:00.31elapsed 125%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6571minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 134%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6581minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.38system 0:00.31elapsed 138%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6600minor)pagefaults 0swaps -----------------wo end -------------------------- with patch: ------------------w begin -------------------------- 0.02user 0.31system 0:00.24elapsed 141%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6554minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 127%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6606minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.33system 0:00.26elapsed 155%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6559minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.32system 0:00.26elapsed 151%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.26elapsed 150%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6603minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.36system 0:00.31elapsed 124%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 147%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6586minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.37system 0:00.27elapsed 146%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.36system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6557minor)pagefaults 0swaps ------------------w end -------------------------- The middle value of elapsed time is: wo cryptwq: 0.31 w cryptwq: 0.26 The performance gain is about (0.31-0.26)/0.26 = 0.192. Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
2009-02-19 14:42:19 +08:00
crypto: cryptd - Per-CPU thread implementation based on kcrypto_wq Original cryptd thread implementation has scalability issue, this patch solve the issue with a per-CPU thread implementation. struct cryptd_queue is defined to be a per-CPU queue, which holds one struct cryptd_cpu_queue for each CPU. In struct cryptd_cpu_queue, a struct crypto_queue holds all requests for the CPU, a struct work_struct is used to run all requests for the CPU. Testing based on dm-crypt on an Intel Core 2 E6400 (two cores) machine shows 19.2% performance gain. The testing script is as follow: -------------------- script begin --------------------------- #!/bin/sh dmc_create() { # Create a crypt device using dmsetup dmsetup create $2 --table "0 `blockdev --getsize $1` crypt cbc(aes-asm)?cryptd?plain:plain babebabebabebabebabebabebabebabe 0 $1 0" } dmsetup remove crypt0 dmsetup remove crypt1 dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram0 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram1 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dmc_create /dev/ram0 crypt0 dmc_create /dev/ram1 crypt1 cat >tr.sh <<EOF #!/bin/sh for n in \$(seq 10); do dd if=/dev/dm-0 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & dd if=/dev/dm-1 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & done wait EOF for n in $(seq 10); do /usr/bin/time sh tr.sh done rm tr.sh -------------------- script end --------------------------- The separator of dm-crypt parameter is changed from "-" to "?", because "-" is used in some cipher driver name too, and cryptds need to specify cipher driver name instead of cipher name. The test result on an Intel Core2 E6400 (two cores) is as follow: without patch: -----------------wo begin -------------------------- 0.04user 0.38system 0:00.39elapsed 107%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6566minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.35system 0:00.35elapsed 121%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6567minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 135%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.36elapsed 119%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6607minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.36system 0:00.35elapsed 120%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.31elapsed 136%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 126%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6597minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.32system 0:00.31elapsed 125%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6571minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 134%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6581minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.38system 0:00.31elapsed 138%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6600minor)pagefaults 0swaps -----------------wo end -------------------------- with patch: ------------------w begin -------------------------- 0.02user 0.31system 0:00.24elapsed 141%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6554minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 127%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6606minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.33system 0:00.26elapsed 155%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6559minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.32system 0:00.26elapsed 151%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.26elapsed 150%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6603minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.36system 0:00.31elapsed 124%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 147%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6586minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.37system 0:00.27elapsed 146%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.36system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6557minor)pagefaults 0swaps ------------------w end -------------------------- The middle value of elapsed time is: wo cryptwq: 0.31 w cryptwq: 0.26 The performance gain is about (0.31-0.26)/0.26 = 0.192. Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
2009-02-19 14:42:19 +08:00
crypto: cryptd - Per-CPU thread implementation based on kcrypto_wq Original cryptd thread implementation has scalability issue, this patch solve the issue with a per-CPU thread implementation. struct cryptd_queue is defined to be a per-CPU queue, which holds one struct cryptd_cpu_queue for each CPU. In struct cryptd_cpu_queue, a struct crypto_queue holds all requests for the CPU, a struct work_struct is used to run all requests for the CPU. Testing based on dm-crypt on an Intel Core 2 E6400 (two cores) machine shows 19.2% performance gain. The testing script is as follow: -------------------- script begin --------------------------- #!/bin/sh dmc_create() { # Create a crypt device using dmsetup dmsetup create $2 --table "0 `blockdev --getsize $1` crypt cbc(aes-asm)?cryptd?plain:plain babebabebabebabebabebabebabebabe 0 $1 0" } dmsetup remove crypt0 dmsetup remove crypt1 dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram0 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram1 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dmc_create /dev/ram0 crypt0 dmc_create /dev/ram1 crypt1 cat >tr.sh <<EOF #!/bin/sh for n in \$(seq 10); do dd if=/dev/dm-0 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & dd if=/dev/dm-1 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & done wait EOF for n in $(seq 10); do /usr/bin/time sh tr.sh done rm tr.sh -------------------- script end --------------------------- The separator of dm-crypt parameter is changed from "-" to "?", because "-" is used in some cipher driver name too, and cryptds need to specify cipher driver name instead of cipher name. The test result on an Intel Core2 E6400 (two cores) is as follow: without patch: -----------------wo begin -------------------------- 0.04user 0.38system 0:00.39elapsed 107%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6566minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.35system 0:00.35elapsed 121%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6567minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 135%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.36elapsed 119%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6607minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.36system 0:00.35elapsed 120%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.31elapsed 136%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 126%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6597minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.32system 0:00.31elapsed 125%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6571minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 134%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6581minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.38system 0:00.31elapsed 138%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6600minor)pagefaults 0swaps -----------------wo end -------------------------- with patch: ------------------w begin -------------------------- 0.02user 0.31system 0:00.24elapsed 141%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6554minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 127%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6606minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.33system 0:00.26elapsed 155%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6559minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.32system 0:00.26elapsed 151%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.26elapsed 150%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6603minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.36system 0:00.31elapsed 124%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 147%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6586minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.37system 0:00.27elapsed 146%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.36system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6557minor)pagefaults 0swaps ------------------w end -------------------------- The middle value of elapsed time is: wo cryptwq: 0.31 w cryptwq: 0.26 The performance gain is about (0.31-0.26)/0.26 = 0.192. Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
2009-02-19 14:42:19 +08:00
crypto: cryptd - Per-CPU thread implementation based on kcrypto_wq Original cryptd thread implementation has scalability issue, this patch solve the issue with a per-CPU thread implementation. struct cryptd_queue is defined to be a per-CPU queue, which holds one struct cryptd_cpu_queue for each CPU. In struct cryptd_cpu_queue, a struct crypto_queue holds all requests for the CPU, a struct work_struct is used to run all requests for the CPU. Testing based on dm-crypt on an Intel Core 2 E6400 (two cores) machine shows 19.2% performance gain. The testing script is as follow: -------------------- script begin --------------------------- #!/bin/sh dmc_create() { # Create a crypt device using dmsetup dmsetup create $2 --table "0 `blockdev --getsize $1` crypt cbc(aes-asm)?cryptd?plain:plain babebabebabebabebabebabebabebabe 0 $1 0" } dmsetup remove crypt0 dmsetup remove crypt1 dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram0 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram1 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dmc_create /dev/ram0 crypt0 dmc_create /dev/ram1 crypt1 cat >tr.sh <<EOF #!/bin/sh for n in \$(seq 10); do dd if=/dev/dm-0 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & dd if=/dev/dm-1 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & done wait EOF for n in $(seq 10); do /usr/bin/time sh tr.sh done rm tr.sh -------------------- script end --------------------------- The separator of dm-crypt parameter is changed from "-" to "?", because "-" is used in some cipher driver name too, and cryptds need to specify cipher driver name instead of cipher name. The test result on an Intel Core2 E6400 (two cores) is as follow: without patch: -----------------wo begin -------------------------- 0.04user 0.38system 0:00.39elapsed 107%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6566minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.35system 0:00.35elapsed 121%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6567minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 135%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.36elapsed 119%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6607minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.36system 0:00.35elapsed 120%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.31elapsed 136%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 126%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6597minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.32system 0:00.31elapsed 125%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6571minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 134%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6581minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.38system 0:00.31elapsed 138%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6600minor)pagefaults 0swaps -----------------wo end -------------------------- with patch: ------------------w begin -------------------------- 0.02user 0.31system 0:00.24elapsed 141%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6554minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 127%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6606minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.33system 0:00.26elapsed 155%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6559minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.32system 0:00.26elapsed 151%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.26elapsed 150%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6603minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.36system 0:00.31elapsed 124%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 147%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6586minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.37system 0:00.27elapsed 146%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.36system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6557minor)pagefaults 0swaps ------------------w end -------------------------- The middle value of elapsed time is: wo cryptwq: 0.31 w cryptwq: 0.26 The performance gain is about (0.31-0.26)/0.26 = 0.192. Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
2009-02-19 14:42:19 +08:00
crypto: cryptd - Per-CPU thread implementation based on kcrypto_wq Original cryptd thread implementation has scalability issue, this patch solve the issue with a per-CPU thread implementation. struct cryptd_queue is defined to be a per-CPU queue, which holds one struct cryptd_cpu_queue for each CPU. In struct cryptd_cpu_queue, a struct crypto_queue holds all requests for the CPU, a struct work_struct is used to run all requests for the CPU. Testing based on dm-crypt on an Intel Core 2 E6400 (two cores) machine shows 19.2% performance gain. The testing script is as follow: -------------------- script begin --------------------------- #!/bin/sh dmc_create() { # Create a crypt device using dmsetup dmsetup create $2 --table "0 `blockdev --getsize $1` crypt cbc(aes-asm)?cryptd?plain:plain babebabebabebabebabebabebabebabe 0 $1 0" } dmsetup remove crypt0 dmsetup remove crypt1 dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram0 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram1 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dmc_create /dev/ram0 crypt0 dmc_create /dev/ram1 crypt1 cat >tr.sh <<EOF #!/bin/sh for n in \$(seq 10); do dd if=/dev/dm-0 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & dd if=/dev/dm-1 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & done wait EOF for n in $(seq 10); do /usr/bin/time sh tr.sh done rm tr.sh -------------------- script end --------------------------- The separator of dm-crypt parameter is changed from "-" to "?", because "-" is used in some cipher driver name too, and cryptds need to specify cipher driver name instead of cipher name. The test result on an Intel Core2 E6400 (two cores) is as follow: without patch: -----------------wo begin -------------------------- 0.04user 0.38system 0:00.39elapsed 107%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6566minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.35system 0:00.35elapsed 121%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6567minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 135%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.36elapsed 119%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6607minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.36system 0:00.35elapsed 120%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.31elapsed 136%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 126%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6597minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.32system 0:00.31elapsed 125%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6571minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 134%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6581minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.38system 0:00.31elapsed 138%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6600minor)pagefaults 0swaps -----------------wo end -------------------------- with patch: ------------------w begin -------------------------- 0.02user 0.31system 0:00.24elapsed 141%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6554minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 127%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6606minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.33system 0:00.26elapsed 155%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6559minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.32system 0:00.26elapsed 151%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.26elapsed 150%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6603minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.36system 0:00.31elapsed 124%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 147%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6586minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.37system 0:00.27elapsed 146%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.36system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6557minor)pagefaults 0swaps ------------------w end -------------------------- The middle value of elapsed time is: wo cryptwq: 0.31 w cryptwq: 0.26 The performance gain is about (0.31-0.26)/0.26 = 0.192. Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
2009-02-19 14:42:19 +08:00
crypto: cryptd - Per-CPU thread implementation based on kcrypto_wq Original cryptd thread implementation has scalability issue, this patch solve the issue with a per-CPU thread implementation. struct cryptd_queue is defined to be a per-CPU queue, which holds one struct cryptd_cpu_queue for each CPU. In struct cryptd_cpu_queue, a struct crypto_queue holds all requests for the CPU, a struct work_struct is used to run all requests for the CPU. Testing based on dm-crypt on an Intel Core 2 E6400 (two cores) machine shows 19.2% performance gain. The testing script is as follow: -------------------- script begin --------------------------- #!/bin/sh dmc_create() { # Create a crypt device using dmsetup dmsetup create $2 --table "0 `blockdev --getsize $1` crypt cbc(aes-asm)?cryptd?plain:plain babebabebabebabebabebabebabebabe 0 $1 0" } dmsetup remove crypt0 dmsetup remove crypt1 dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram0 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram1 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dmc_create /dev/ram0 crypt0 dmc_create /dev/ram1 crypt1 cat >tr.sh <<EOF #!/bin/sh for n in \$(seq 10); do dd if=/dev/dm-0 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & dd if=/dev/dm-1 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & done wait EOF for n in $(seq 10); do /usr/bin/time sh tr.sh done rm tr.sh -------------------- script end --------------------------- The separator of dm-crypt parameter is changed from "-" to "?", because "-" is used in some cipher driver name too, and cryptds need to specify cipher driver name instead of cipher name. The test result on an Intel Core2 E6400 (two cores) is as follow: without patch: -----------------wo begin -------------------------- 0.04user 0.38system 0:00.39elapsed 107%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6566minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.35system 0:00.35elapsed 121%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6567minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 135%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.36elapsed 119%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6607minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.36system 0:00.35elapsed 120%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.31elapsed 136%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 126%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6597minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.32system 0:00.31elapsed 125%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6571minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 134%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6581minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.38system 0:00.31elapsed 138%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6600minor)pagefaults 0swaps -----------------wo end -------------------------- with patch: ------------------w begin -------------------------- 0.02user 0.31system 0:00.24elapsed 141%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6554minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 127%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6606minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.33system 0:00.26elapsed 155%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6559minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.32system 0:00.26elapsed 151%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.26elapsed 150%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6603minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.36system 0:00.31elapsed 124%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 147%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6586minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.37system 0:00.27elapsed 146%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.36system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6557minor)pagefaults 0swaps ------------------w end -------------------------- The middle value of elapsed time is: wo cryptwq: 0.31 w cryptwq: 0.26 The performance gain is about (0.31-0.26)/0.26 = 0.192. Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
2009-02-19 14:42:19 +08:00
crypto: cryptd - Per-CPU thread implementation based on kcrypto_wq Original cryptd thread implementation has scalability issue, this patch solve the issue with a per-CPU thread implementation. struct cryptd_queue is defined to be a per-CPU queue, which holds one struct cryptd_cpu_queue for each CPU. In struct cryptd_cpu_queue, a struct crypto_queue holds all requests for the CPU, a struct work_struct is used to run all requests for the CPU. Testing based on dm-crypt on an Intel Core 2 E6400 (two cores) machine shows 19.2% performance gain. The testing script is as follow: -------------------- script begin --------------------------- #!/bin/sh dmc_create() { # Create a crypt device using dmsetup dmsetup create $2 --table "0 `blockdev --getsize $1` crypt cbc(aes-asm)?cryptd?plain:plain babebabebabebabebabebabebabebabe 0 $1 0" } dmsetup remove crypt0 dmsetup remove crypt1 dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram0 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram1 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dmc_create /dev/ram0 crypt0 dmc_create /dev/ram1 crypt1 cat >tr.sh <<EOF #!/bin/sh for n in \$(seq 10); do dd if=/dev/dm-0 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & dd if=/dev/dm-1 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & done wait EOF for n in $(seq 10); do /usr/bin/time sh tr.sh done rm tr.sh -------------------- script end --------------------------- The separator of dm-crypt parameter is changed from "-" to "?", because "-" is used in some cipher driver name too, and cryptds need to specify cipher driver name instead of cipher name. The test result on an Intel Core2 E6400 (two cores) is as follow: without patch: -----------------wo begin -------------------------- 0.04user 0.38system 0:00.39elapsed 107%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6566minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.35system 0:00.35elapsed 121%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6567minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 135%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.36elapsed 119%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6607minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.36system 0:00.35elapsed 120%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.31elapsed 136%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 126%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6597minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.32system 0:00.31elapsed 125%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6571minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 134%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6581minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.38system 0:00.31elapsed 138%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6600minor)pagefaults 0swaps -----------------wo end -------------------------- with patch: ------------------w begin -------------------------- 0.02user 0.31system 0:00.24elapsed 141%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6554minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 127%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6606minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.33system 0:00.26elapsed 155%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6559minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.32system 0:00.26elapsed 151%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.26elapsed 150%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6603minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.36system 0:00.31elapsed 124%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 147%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6586minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.37system 0:00.27elapsed 146%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.36system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6557minor)pagefaults 0swaps ------------------w end -------------------------- The middle value of elapsed time is: wo cryptwq: 0.31 w cryptwq: 0.26 The performance gain is about (0.31-0.26)/0.26 = 0.192. Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
2009-02-19 14:42:19 +08:00
crypto: cryptd - Per-CPU thread implementation based on kcrypto_wq Original cryptd thread implementation has scalability issue, this patch solve the issue with a per-CPU thread implementation. struct cryptd_queue is defined to be a per-CPU queue, which holds one struct cryptd_cpu_queue for each CPU. In struct cryptd_cpu_queue, a struct crypto_queue holds all requests for the CPU, a struct work_struct is used to run all requests for the CPU. Testing based on dm-crypt on an Intel Core 2 E6400 (two cores) machine shows 19.2% performance gain. The testing script is as follow: -------------------- script begin --------------------------- #!/bin/sh dmc_create() { # Create a crypt device using dmsetup dmsetup create $2 --table "0 `blockdev --getsize $1` crypt cbc(aes-asm)?cryptd?plain:plain babebabebabebabebabebabebabebabe 0 $1 0" } dmsetup remove crypt0 dmsetup remove crypt1 dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram0 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram1 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dmc_create /dev/ram0 crypt0 dmc_create /dev/ram1 crypt1 cat >tr.sh <<EOF #!/bin/sh for n in \$(seq 10); do dd if=/dev/dm-0 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & dd if=/dev/dm-1 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & done wait EOF for n in $(seq 10); do /usr/bin/time sh tr.sh done rm tr.sh -------------------- script end --------------------------- The separator of dm-crypt parameter is changed from "-" to "?", because "-" is used in some cipher driver name too, and cryptds need to specify cipher driver name instead of cipher name. The test result on an Intel Core2 E6400 (two cores) is as follow: without patch: -----------------wo begin -------------------------- 0.04user 0.38system 0:00.39elapsed 107%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6566minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.35system 0:00.35elapsed 121%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6567minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 135%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.36elapsed 119%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6607minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.36system 0:00.35elapsed 120%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.31elapsed 136%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 126%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6597minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.32system 0:00.31elapsed 125%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6571minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 134%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6581minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.38system 0:00.31elapsed 138%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6600minor)pagefaults 0swaps -----------------wo end -------------------------- with patch: ------------------w begin -------------------------- 0.02user 0.31system 0:00.24elapsed 141%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6554minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 127%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6606minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.33system 0:00.26elapsed 155%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6559minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.32system 0:00.26elapsed 151%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.26elapsed 150%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6603minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.36system 0:00.31elapsed 124%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 147%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6586minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.37system 0:00.27elapsed 146%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.36system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6557minor)pagefaults 0swaps ------------------w end -------------------------- The middle value of elapsed time is: wo cryptwq: 0.31 w cryptwq: 0.26 The performance gain is about (0.31-0.26)/0.26 = 0.192. Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
2009-02-19 14:42:19 +08:00
crypto: cryptd - Per-CPU thread implementation based on kcrypto_wq Original cryptd thread implementation has scalability issue, this patch solve the issue with a per-CPU thread implementation. struct cryptd_queue is defined to be a per-CPU queue, which holds one struct cryptd_cpu_queue for each CPU. In struct cryptd_cpu_queue, a struct crypto_queue holds all requests for the CPU, a struct work_struct is used to run all requests for the CPU. Testing based on dm-crypt on an Intel Core 2 E6400 (two cores) machine shows 19.2% performance gain. The testing script is as follow: -------------------- script begin --------------------------- #!/bin/sh dmc_create() { # Create a crypt device using dmsetup dmsetup create $2 --table "0 `blockdev --getsize $1` crypt cbc(aes-asm)?cryptd?plain:plain babebabebabebabebabebabebabebabe 0 $1 0" } dmsetup remove crypt0 dmsetup remove crypt1 dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram0 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram1 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dmc_create /dev/ram0 crypt0 dmc_create /dev/ram1 crypt1 cat >tr.sh <<EOF #!/bin/sh for n in \$(seq 10); do dd if=/dev/dm-0 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & dd if=/dev/dm-1 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & done wait EOF for n in $(seq 10); do /usr/bin/time sh tr.sh done rm tr.sh -------------------- script end --------------------------- The separator of dm-crypt parameter is changed from "-" to "?", because "-" is used in some cipher driver name too, and cryptds need to specify cipher driver name instead of cipher name. The test result on an Intel Core2 E6400 (two cores) is as follow: without patch: -----------------wo begin -------------------------- 0.04user 0.38system 0:00.39elapsed 107%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6566minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.35system 0:00.35elapsed 121%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6567minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 135%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.36elapsed 119%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6607minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.36system 0:00.35elapsed 120%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.31elapsed 136%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 126%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6597minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.32system 0:00.31elapsed 125%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6571minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 134%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6581minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.38system 0:00.31elapsed 138%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6600minor)pagefaults 0swaps -----------------wo end -------------------------- with patch: ------------------w begin -------------------------- 0.02user 0.31system 0:00.24elapsed 141%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6554minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 127%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6606minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.33system 0:00.26elapsed 155%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6559minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.32system 0:00.26elapsed 151%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.26elapsed 150%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6603minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.36system 0:00.31elapsed 124%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 147%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6586minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.37system 0:00.27elapsed 146%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.36system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6557minor)pagefaults 0swaps ------------------w end -------------------------- The middle value of elapsed time is: wo cryptwq: 0.31 w cryptwq: 0.26 The performance gain is about (0.31-0.26)/0.26 = 0.192. Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
2009-02-19 14:42:19 +08:00
crypto: cryptd - Per-CPU thread implementation based on kcrypto_wq Original cryptd thread implementation has scalability issue, this patch solve the issue with a per-CPU thread implementation. struct cryptd_queue is defined to be a per-CPU queue, which holds one struct cryptd_cpu_queue for each CPU. In struct cryptd_cpu_queue, a struct crypto_queue holds all requests for the CPU, a struct work_struct is used to run all requests for the CPU. Testing based on dm-crypt on an Intel Core 2 E6400 (two cores) machine shows 19.2% performance gain. The testing script is as follow: -------------------- script begin --------------------------- #!/bin/sh dmc_create() { # Create a crypt device using dmsetup dmsetup create $2 --table "0 `blockdev --getsize $1` crypt cbc(aes-asm)?cryptd?plain:plain babebabebabebabebabebabebabebabe 0 $1 0" } dmsetup remove crypt0 dmsetup remove crypt1 dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram0 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram1 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dmc_create /dev/ram0 crypt0 dmc_create /dev/ram1 crypt1 cat >tr.sh <<EOF #!/bin/sh for n in \$(seq 10); do dd if=/dev/dm-0 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & dd if=/dev/dm-1 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & done wait EOF for n in $(seq 10); do /usr/bin/time sh tr.sh done rm tr.sh -------------------- script end --------------------------- The separator of dm-crypt parameter is changed from "-" to "?", because "-" is used in some cipher driver name too, and cryptds need to specify cipher driver name instead of cipher name. The test result on an Intel Core2 E6400 (two cores) is as follow: without patch: -----------------wo begin -------------------------- 0.04user 0.38system 0:00.39elapsed 107%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6566minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.35system 0:00.35elapsed 121%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6567minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 135%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.36elapsed 119%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6607minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.36system 0:00.35elapsed 120%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.31elapsed 136%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 126%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6597minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.32system 0:00.31elapsed 125%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6571minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 134%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6581minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.38system 0:00.31elapsed 138%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6600minor)pagefaults 0swaps -----------------wo end -------------------------- with patch: ------------------w begin -------------------------- 0.02user 0.31system 0:00.24elapsed 141%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6554minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 127%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6606minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.33system 0:00.26elapsed 155%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6559minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.32system 0:00.26elapsed 151%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.26elapsed 150%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6603minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.36system 0:00.31elapsed 124%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 147%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6586minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.37system 0:00.27elapsed 146%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.36system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6557minor)pagefaults 0swaps ------------------w end -------------------------- The middle value of elapsed time is: wo cryptwq: 0.31 w cryptwq: 0.26 The performance gain is about (0.31-0.26)/0.26 = 0.192. Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
2009-02-19 14:42:19 +08:00
crypto: cryptd - Per-CPU thread implementation based on kcrypto_wq Original cryptd thread implementation has scalability issue, this patch solve the issue with a per-CPU thread implementation. struct cryptd_queue is defined to be a per-CPU queue, which holds one struct cryptd_cpu_queue for each CPU. In struct cryptd_cpu_queue, a struct crypto_queue holds all requests for the CPU, a struct work_struct is used to run all requests for the CPU. Testing based on dm-crypt on an Intel Core 2 E6400 (two cores) machine shows 19.2% performance gain. The testing script is as follow: -------------------- script begin --------------------------- #!/bin/sh dmc_create() { # Create a crypt device using dmsetup dmsetup create $2 --table "0 `blockdev --getsize $1` crypt cbc(aes-asm)?cryptd?plain:plain babebabebabebabebabebabebabebabe 0 $1 0" } dmsetup remove crypt0 dmsetup remove crypt1 dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram0 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram1 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dmc_create /dev/ram0 crypt0 dmc_create /dev/ram1 crypt1 cat >tr.sh <<EOF #!/bin/sh for n in \$(seq 10); do dd if=/dev/dm-0 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & dd if=/dev/dm-1 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & done wait EOF for n in $(seq 10); do /usr/bin/time sh tr.sh done rm tr.sh -------------------- script end --------------------------- The separator of dm-crypt parameter is changed from "-" to "?", because "-" is used in some cipher driver name too, and cryptds need to specify cipher driver name instead of cipher name. The test result on an Intel Core2 E6400 (two cores) is as follow: without patch: -----------------wo begin -------------------------- 0.04user 0.38system 0:00.39elapsed 107%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6566minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.35system 0:00.35elapsed 121%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6567minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 135%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.36elapsed 119%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6607minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.36system 0:00.35elapsed 120%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.31elapsed 136%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 126%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6597minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.32system 0:00.31elapsed 125%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6571minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 134%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6581minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.38system 0:00.31elapsed 138%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6600minor)pagefaults 0swaps -----------------wo end -------------------------- with patch: ------------------w begin -------------------------- 0.02user 0.31system 0:00.24elapsed 141%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6554minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 127%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6606minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.33system 0:00.26elapsed 155%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6559minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.32system 0:00.26elapsed 151%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.26elapsed 150%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6603minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.36system 0:00.31elapsed 124%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 147%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6586minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.37system 0:00.27elapsed 146%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.36system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6557minor)pagefaults 0swaps ------------------w end -------------------------- The middle value of elapsed time is: wo cryptwq: 0.31 w cryptwq: 0.26 The performance gain is about (0.31-0.26)/0.26 = 0.192. Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
2009-02-19 14:42:19 +08:00
crypto: cryptd - Per-CPU thread implementation based on kcrypto_wq Original cryptd thread implementation has scalability issue, this patch solve the issue with a per-CPU thread implementation. struct cryptd_queue is defined to be a per-CPU queue, which holds one struct cryptd_cpu_queue for each CPU. In struct cryptd_cpu_queue, a struct crypto_queue holds all requests for the CPU, a struct work_struct is used to run all requests for the CPU. Testing based on dm-crypt on an Intel Core 2 E6400 (two cores) machine shows 19.2% performance gain. The testing script is as follow: -------------------- script begin --------------------------- #!/bin/sh dmc_create() { # Create a crypt device using dmsetup dmsetup create $2 --table "0 `blockdev --getsize $1` crypt cbc(aes-asm)?cryptd?plain:plain babebabebabebabebabebabebabebabe 0 $1 0" } dmsetup remove crypt0 dmsetup remove crypt1 dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram0 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram1 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dmc_create /dev/ram0 crypt0 dmc_create /dev/ram1 crypt1 cat >tr.sh <<EOF #!/bin/sh for n in \$(seq 10); do dd if=/dev/dm-0 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & dd if=/dev/dm-1 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & done wait EOF for n in $(seq 10); do /usr/bin/time sh tr.sh done rm tr.sh -------------------- script end --------------------------- The separator of dm-crypt parameter is changed from "-" to "?", because "-" is used in some cipher driver name too, and cryptds need to specify cipher driver name instead of cipher name. The test result on an Intel Core2 E6400 (two cores) is as follow: without patch: -----------------wo begin -------------------------- 0.04user 0.38system 0:00.39elapsed 107%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6566minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.35system 0:00.35elapsed 121%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6567minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 135%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.36elapsed 119%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6607minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.36system 0:00.35elapsed 120%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.31elapsed 136%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 126%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6597minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.32system 0:00.31elapsed 125%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6571minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 134%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6581minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.38system 0:00.31elapsed 138%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6600minor)pagefaults 0swaps -----------------wo end -------------------------- with patch: ------------------w begin -------------------------- 0.02user 0.31system 0:00.24elapsed 141%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6554minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 127%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6606minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.33system 0:00.26elapsed 155%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6559minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.32system 0:00.26elapsed 151%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.26elapsed 150%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6603minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.36system 0:00.31elapsed 124%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 147%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6586minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.37system 0:00.27elapsed 146%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.36system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6557minor)pagefaults 0swaps ------------------w end -------------------------- The middle value of elapsed time is: wo cryptwq: 0.31 w cryptwq: 0.26 The performance gain is about (0.31-0.26)/0.26 = 0.192. Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
2009-02-19 14:42:19 +08:00
crypto: cryptd - Per-CPU thread implementation based on kcrypto_wq Original cryptd thread implementation has scalability issue, this patch solve the issue with a per-CPU thread implementation. struct cryptd_queue is defined to be a per-CPU queue, which holds one struct cryptd_cpu_queue for each CPU. In struct cryptd_cpu_queue, a struct crypto_queue holds all requests for the CPU, a struct work_struct is used to run all requests for the CPU. Testing based on dm-crypt on an Intel Core 2 E6400 (two cores) machine shows 19.2% performance gain. The testing script is as follow: -------------------- script begin --------------------------- #!/bin/sh dmc_create() { # Create a crypt device using dmsetup dmsetup create $2 --table "0 `blockdev --getsize $1` crypt cbc(aes-asm)?cryptd?plain:plain babebabebabebabebabebabebabebabe 0 $1 0" } dmsetup remove crypt0 dmsetup remove crypt1 dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram0 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram1 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dmc_create /dev/ram0 crypt0 dmc_create /dev/ram1 crypt1 cat >tr.sh <<EOF #!/bin/sh for n in \$(seq 10); do dd if=/dev/dm-0 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & dd if=/dev/dm-1 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & done wait EOF for n in $(seq 10); do /usr/bin/time sh tr.sh done rm tr.sh -------------------- script end --------------------------- The separator of dm-crypt parameter is changed from "-" to "?", because "-" is used in some cipher driver name too, and cryptds need to specify cipher driver name instead of cipher name. The test result on an Intel Core2 E6400 (two cores) is as follow: without patch: -----------------wo begin -------------------------- 0.04user 0.38system 0:00.39elapsed 107%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6566minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.35system 0:00.35elapsed 121%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6567minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 135%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.36elapsed 119%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6607minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.36system 0:00.35elapsed 120%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.31elapsed 136%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 126%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6597minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.32system 0:00.31elapsed 125%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6571minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 134%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6581minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.38system 0:00.31elapsed 138%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6600minor)pagefaults 0swaps -----------------wo end -------------------------- with patch: ------------------w begin -------------------------- 0.02user 0.31system 0:00.24elapsed 141%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6554minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 127%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6606minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.33system 0:00.26elapsed 155%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6559minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.32system 0:00.26elapsed 151%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.26elapsed 150%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6603minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.36system 0:00.31elapsed 124%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 147%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6586minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.37system 0:00.27elapsed 146%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.36system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6557minor)pagefaults 0swaps ------------------w end -------------------------- The middle value of elapsed time is: wo cryptwq: 0.31 w cryptwq: 0.26 The performance gain is about (0.31-0.26)/0.26 = 0.192. Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
2009-02-19 14:42:19 +08:00
crypto: cryptd - Per-CPU thread implementation based on kcrypto_wq Original cryptd thread implementation has scalability issue, this patch solve the issue with a per-CPU thread implementation. struct cryptd_queue is defined to be a per-CPU queue, which holds one struct cryptd_cpu_queue for each CPU. In struct cryptd_cpu_queue, a struct crypto_queue holds all requests for the CPU, a struct work_struct is used to run all requests for the CPU. Testing based on dm-crypt on an Intel Core 2 E6400 (two cores) machine shows 19.2% performance gain. The testing script is as follow: -------------------- script begin --------------------------- #!/bin/sh dmc_create() { # Create a crypt device using dmsetup dmsetup create $2 --table "0 `blockdev --getsize $1` crypt cbc(aes-asm)?cryptd?plain:plain babebabebabebabebabebabebabebabe 0 $1 0" } dmsetup remove crypt0 dmsetup remove crypt1 dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram0 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram1 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dmc_create /dev/ram0 crypt0 dmc_create /dev/ram1 crypt1 cat >tr.sh <<EOF #!/bin/sh for n in \$(seq 10); do dd if=/dev/dm-0 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & dd if=/dev/dm-1 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & done wait EOF for n in $(seq 10); do /usr/bin/time sh tr.sh done rm tr.sh -------------------- script end --------------------------- The separator of dm-crypt parameter is changed from "-" to "?", because "-" is used in some cipher driver name too, and cryptds need to specify cipher driver name instead of cipher name. The test result on an Intel Core2 E6400 (two cores) is as follow: without patch: -----------------wo begin -------------------------- 0.04user 0.38system 0:00.39elapsed 107%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6566minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.35system 0:00.35elapsed 121%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6567minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 135%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.36elapsed 119%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6607minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.36system 0:00.35elapsed 120%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.31elapsed 136%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 126%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6597minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.32system 0:00.31elapsed 125%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6571minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 134%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6581minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.38system 0:00.31elapsed 138%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6600minor)pagefaults 0swaps -----------------wo end -------------------------- with patch: ------------------w begin -------------------------- 0.02user 0.31system 0:00.24elapsed 141%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6554minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 127%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6606minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.33system 0:00.26elapsed 155%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6559minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.32system 0:00.26elapsed 151%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.26elapsed 150%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6603minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.36system 0:00.31elapsed 124%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 147%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6586minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.37system 0:00.27elapsed 146%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.36system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6557minor)pagefaults 0swaps ------------------w end -------------------------- The middle value of elapsed time is: wo cryptwq: 0.31 w cryptwq: 0.26 The performance gain is about (0.31-0.26)/0.26 = 0.192. Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
2009-02-19 14:42:19 +08:00
crypto: cryptd - Per-CPU thread implementation based on kcrypto_wq Original cryptd thread implementation has scalability issue, this patch solve the issue with a per-CPU thread implementation. struct cryptd_queue is defined to be a per-CPU queue, which holds one struct cryptd_cpu_queue for each CPU. In struct cryptd_cpu_queue, a struct crypto_queue holds all requests for the CPU, a struct work_struct is used to run all requests for the CPU. Testing based on dm-crypt on an Intel Core 2 E6400 (two cores) machine shows 19.2% performance gain. The testing script is as follow: -------------------- script begin --------------------------- #!/bin/sh dmc_create() { # Create a crypt device using dmsetup dmsetup create $2 --table "0 `blockdev --getsize $1` crypt cbc(aes-asm)?cryptd?plain:plain babebabebabebabebabebabebabebabe 0 $1 0" } dmsetup remove crypt0 dmsetup remove crypt1 dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram0 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram1 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dmc_create /dev/ram0 crypt0 dmc_create /dev/ram1 crypt1 cat >tr.sh <<EOF #!/bin/sh for n in \$(seq 10); do dd if=/dev/dm-0 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & dd if=/dev/dm-1 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & done wait EOF for n in $(seq 10); do /usr/bin/time sh tr.sh done rm tr.sh -------------------- script end --------------------------- The separator of dm-crypt parameter is changed from "-" to "?", because "-" is used in some cipher driver name too, and cryptds need to specify cipher driver name instead of cipher name. The test result on an Intel Core2 E6400 (two cores) is as follow: without patch: -----------------wo begin -------------------------- 0.04user 0.38system 0:00.39elapsed 107%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6566minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.35system 0:00.35elapsed 121%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6567minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 135%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.36elapsed 119%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6607minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.36system 0:00.35elapsed 120%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.31elapsed 136%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 126%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6597minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.32system 0:00.31elapsed 125%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6571minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 134%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6581minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.38system 0:00.31elapsed 138%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6600minor)pagefaults 0swaps -----------------wo end -------------------------- with patch: ------------------w begin -------------------------- 0.02user 0.31system 0:00.24elapsed 141%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6554minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 127%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6606minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.33system 0:00.26elapsed 155%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6559minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.32system 0:00.26elapsed 151%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.26elapsed 150%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6603minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.36system 0:00.31elapsed 124%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 147%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6586minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.37system 0:00.27elapsed 146%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.36system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6557minor)pagefaults 0swaps ------------------w end -------------------------- The middle value of elapsed time is: wo cryptwq: 0.31 w cryptwq: 0.26 The performance gain is about (0.31-0.26)/0.26 = 0.192. Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
2009-02-19 14:42:19 +08:00
crypto: cryptd - WQ_PERCPU added to alloc_workqueue users Currently if a user enqueue a work item using schedule_delayed_work() the used wq is "system_wq" (per-cpu wq) while queue_delayed_work() use WORK_CPU_UNBOUND (used when a cpu is not specified). The same applies to schedule_work() that is using system_wq and queue_work(), that makes use again of WORK_CPU_UNBOUND. This lack of consistentcy cannot be addressed without refactoring the API. alloc_workqueue() treats all queues as per-CPU by default, while unbound workqueues must opt-in via WQ_UNBOUND. This default is suboptimal: most workloads benefit from unbound queues, allowing the scheduler to place worker threads where they’re needed and reducing noise when CPUs are isolated. This default is suboptimal: most workloads benefit from unbound queues, allowing the scheduler to place worker threads where they’re needed and reducing noise when CPUs are isolated. This patch adds a new WQ_PERCPU flag to explicitly request the use of the per-CPU behavior. Both flags coexist for one release cycle to allow callers to transition their calls. Once migration is complete, WQ_UNBOUND can be removed and unbound will become the implicit default. With the introduction of the WQ_PERCPU flag (equivalent to !WQ_UNBOUND), any alloc_workqueue() caller that doesn’t explicitly specify WQ_UNBOUND must now use WQ_PERCPU. All existing users have been updated accordingly. Suggested-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Marco Crivellari <marco.crivellari@suse.com> Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
2025-09-05 10:57:01 +02:00
crypto: cryptd - Per-CPU thread implementation based on kcrypto_wq Original cryptd thread implementation has scalability issue, this patch solve the issue with a per-CPU thread implementation. struct cryptd_queue is defined to be a per-CPU queue, which holds one struct cryptd_cpu_queue for each CPU. In struct cryptd_cpu_queue, a struct crypto_queue holds all requests for the CPU, a struct work_struct is used to run all requests for the CPU. Testing based on dm-crypt on an Intel Core 2 E6400 (two cores) machine shows 19.2% performance gain. The testing script is as follow: -------------------- script begin --------------------------- #!/bin/sh dmc_create() { # Create a crypt device using dmsetup dmsetup create $2 --table "0 `blockdev --getsize $1` crypt cbc(aes-asm)?cryptd?plain:plain babebabebabebabebabebabebabebabe 0 $1 0" } dmsetup remove crypt0 dmsetup remove crypt1 dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram0 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram1 bs=1M count=4 >& /dev/null dmc_create /dev/ram0 crypt0 dmc_create /dev/ram1 crypt1 cat >tr.sh <<EOF #!/bin/sh for n in \$(seq 10); do dd if=/dev/dm-0 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & dd if=/dev/dm-1 of=/dev/null >& /dev/null & done wait EOF for n in $(seq 10); do /usr/bin/time sh tr.sh done rm tr.sh -------------------- script end --------------------------- The separator of dm-crypt parameter is changed from "-" to "?", because "-" is used in some cipher driver name too, and cryptds need to specify cipher driver name instead of cipher name. The test result on an Intel Core2 E6400 (two cores) is as follow: without patch: -----------------wo begin -------------------------- 0.04user 0.38system 0:00.39elapsed 107%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6566minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.35system 0:00.35elapsed 121%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6567minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 135%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.36elapsed 119%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6607minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.36system 0:00.35elapsed 120%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.37system 0:00.31elapsed 136%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.34system 0:00.30elapsed 126%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6597minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.32system 0:00.31elapsed 125%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6571minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.06user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 134%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6581minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.38system 0:00.31elapsed 138%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6600minor)pagefaults 0swaps -----------------wo end -------------------------- with patch: ------------------w begin -------------------------- 0.02user 0.31system 0:00.24elapsed 141%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6554minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.31elapsed 127%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6606minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.33system 0:00.26elapsed 155%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6559minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.07user 0.32system 0:00.26elapsed 151%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.05user 0.34system 0:00.26elapsed 150%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6603minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.36system 0:00.31elapsed 124%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 147%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6586minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.03user 0.37system 0:00.27elapsed 146%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6562minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.36system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6594minor)pagefaults 0swaps 0.04user 0.35system 0:00.26elapsed 154%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+6557minor)pagefaults 0swaps ------------------w end -------------------------- The middle value of elapsed time is: wo cryptwq: 0.31 w cryptwq: 0.26 The performance gain is about (0.31-0.26)/0.26 = 0.192. Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
2009-02-19 14:42:19 +08:00