This reverts commit 66d2e20280.
Quoting from Russell's findings:
https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org/msg21136.html
[quote]
Okay, I've re-tested, using a different way of measuring, because using
openssl speed is impractical for off-loaded engines. I've decided to
use this way to measure the performance:
dd if=/dev/zero bs=1048576 count=128 | /usr/bin/time openssl dgst -md5
For the threaded IRQs case gives:
0.05user 2.74system 0:05.30elapsed 52%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 2400maxresident)k
0.06user 2.52system 0:05.18elapsed 49%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 2404maxresident)k
0.12user 2.60system 0:05.61elapsed 48%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 2460maxresident)k
=> 5.36s => 25.0MB/s
and the tasklet case:
0.08user 2.53system 0:04.83elapsed 54%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 2468maxresident)k
0.09user 2.47system 0:05.16elapsed 49%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 2368maxresident)k
0.10user 2.51system 0:04.87elapsed 53%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 2460maxresident)k
=> 4.95 => 27.1MB/s
which corresponds to an 8% slowdown for the threaded IRQ case. So,
tasklets are indeed faster than threaded IRQs.
[...]
I think I've proven from the above that this patch needs to be reverted
due to the performance regression, and that there _is_ most definitely
a deterimental effect of switching from tasklets to threaded IRQs.
[/quote]
Signed-off-by: Horia Geantă <horia.geanta@nxp.com>
Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
2b163b5bce