Hi, On Tue, Aug 15, 2023, Mauricio Faria de Oliveira wrote: > Hey, > > I'd like to request input (initially thinking of involved teams: SRU, > Foundations) > on backports of some performance improvement patches to OpenSSL in Jammy. > (Please feel free to comment and include others as appropriate.) > > SEG has a customer support ticket about it, which allows us to put in the > work, > but of course, it is OpenSSL, an SRU, thus agreement beforehand is needed. > > ... > > The context is OpenSSL 3.0 has known, significant performance regressions [0] > from OpenSSL 1.1.1, which has been addressed / still in-progress upstream: > 1) some patches in the 3.0 stable branch > 2) some patches in the master branch (ie, not backported to 3.0) > 3) some issues still open > > To offset regression risk, there are benefits; e.g., > 1) Performance: some improvement > 2) Security: smaller delta to 3.0 branch (may help with CVE fix backports) > 3) Community: possibly help with mentions of Ubuntu 22.04 in regressions > > IMHO, backports should be restricted to the 3.0 branch (so not to defeat 2). > > ... > > There are statements in this thread [1] that suggest we only backport bug > and security fixes, certainly understandable, but considering the numbers, > _perhaps_ we should consider it -- that's why I ask your opinion on this. > > For example, the test in bug [2]: > > 1) Focal, OpenSSL 1.1.1: 1.5 seconds > 2) Jammy, OpenSSL 3.0.2: 30 seconds (20x slower) > 3) Jammy, 7 cherrypicks: 5 seconds (3x slower) (PPA [3])
Can you also test this on Mantic? That would tell us if these patches cover regain as much as is possible or if there's more in subsequent patch releases. Thanks, -- Adrien -- Ubuntu-release mailing list Ubuntu-release@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-release
