Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos <n...@gnutls.org> wrote: > > Given my benchmarks have no issues, it is not apparent to me why one > should use AF_ALG instead of cryptodev. I do not know though why AF_ALG > performs so poor. I'd speculate by blaming it on the usage of the socket > API and the number of system calls required.
The target usage of AF_ALG is hardware offload devices that cannot be directly used in user-space, not software crypto on implementations such as AESNI/Padlock. Going through the kernel to use something like AESNI/Padlock or software crypto is insane. Given the intended target case, your numbers are pretty much meaningless as cryptodev's performance can be easily beaten by a pure user-space implementation. Cheers, -- Email: Herbert Xu <herb...@gondor.apana.org.au> Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt _______________________________________________ Cryptodev-linux-devel mailing list Cryptodev-linux-devel@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/cryptodev-linux-devel
