VIA padlock performance

[Jesse Ahrens]

There's no locking in the hardware, all the xcrypt commands are ring3
accessible. Shouldn't be an issue to use either.

> Michael Reifenberger wrote:
>  > On Wed, 19 Jul 2006, Oliver Fromme wrote:
>  > ...
>  > > You will also need "cryptodev" in addition to "crypto".
>  > > "crypto" manages only in-kernel access to the cryptographic
>  > > facilities (including hardware acceleration through the
>  > > padlock driver), which is used by FAST_IPSEC, for example.
>  > > "cryptodev" will enable access by userland applications
>  > > (e.g. scp) and libraries (OpenSSL) through /dev/crypto.
>  >
>  > With OpenSSL you have two choices:
>  > engine cryptodev : uses /dev/crypto
>  > engine padlock : uses the xcrypt commands directly
>  >
>  > engine padlock should be the fastest of course.
>
> Is there any kind of locking (in hardware or software)?
> I mean, what happens if both padlock(4) and OpenSSL try
> to access the ACE engine directly?
>
> (If the answer is "don't do that", then it's probably
> better to use cryptodev with OpenSSL, even if it's a
> little less efficient.)
>
> Best regards
>    Oliver
>
> --
> Oliver Fromme,  secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing
> Dienstleistungen mit Schwerpunkt FreeBSD: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd
> Any opinions expressed in this message may be personal to the author
> and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of secnetix in any way.
>
> "One of the main causes of the fall of the Roman Empire was that,
> lacking zero, they had no way to indicate successful termination
> of their C programs."
>         -- Robert Firth
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-hackers at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>