| To: | Michael Richardson <mcr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Asynchronous crypto layer. |
| From: | James Morris <jmorris@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sun, 31 Oct 2004 11:09:20 -0500 (EST) |
| Cc: | Michal Ludvig <mludvig@xxxxxxx>, <johnpol@xxxxxxxxxxx>, <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>, <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, <cryptoapi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Eugene Surovegin <ebs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <10313.1099236970@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Sun, 31 Oct 2004, Michael Richardson wrote: > There are lots of situations where, yes, a 2Ghz CPU can do IPsec much > faster and with lower latency and with less jitter than hardware. > > However, the CPU might have other important things to do. Things that > make the owner money. I guess control over this should be tunable, perhaps just a boolean of whether to try and aim for raw speed or for reduced CPU contention. - James -- James Morris <jmorris@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Previous by Date: | Re: Asynchronous crypto layer., James Morris |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [PATCH][ATM]: [drivers] add missing pci_tbl exports (pointed out by "Adam J. Richter" <adam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>), chas williams (contractor) |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Asynchronous crypto layer., Michael Richardson |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Asynchronous crypto layer., jamal |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |