3 ms·

From the article comments, it looks like a hardware issue: "Apparently, Google has not merged the various drivers that optimize Qualcomm's QCE module for encry

From the article comments, it looks like a hardware issue: "Apparently, Google has not merged the various drivers that optimize Qualcomm's QCE module for encryption and decryption into AOSP. The generally-assumed reason is that this code is proprietary. Without these optimizations, the Nexus 6's hardware decryption module on the Snapdragon 805 is essentially hamstrung." From: http://www.androidpolice.com/2014/11/20 http://www.androidpolice.com/2014/11/20 ... ot-pretty/

magicalist 12y ago
Also from the comments, ARMv8 requires AES instructions, so having the drivers around won't be a problem in the future. This appears true from the ARMv8-A docs, but can someone more knowledgeable confirm this? Supposedly this is why the Nexus 9 (which is ARMv8-A) does have default encryption and suffers no performance hit.
- mschuster91 12y ago
  > Also from the comments, ARMv8 requires AES instructions Just random guessing around (I have no actual knowledge)... if the mentioned encryption drivers are required for performant cryptography, then it is likely that the encryption is done by a separate core/chip/soc module, totally transparent to the CPU and maybe also battery-saving.
  - ethbro 12y ago
    If so, I imagine it would also fit nicely with big.LITTLE designs.
  - magicalist 12y ago
    Right, sorry, I think the claim is that since ARMv8 requires AES instructions, it no longer needs separate encryption hardware, and the proof is that the Nexus 9 supposedly doesn't have the encryption performance hit that the Nexus 6 does. Native instructions would also require one less closed-source driver, which is also a win.
nly 12y ago
Seems weak to me. I doubt the cipher latency is noticeable even if done in well-optimised software. How much I/O to flash does a phone, once booted, really do anyway? There may be a battery life argument...but pfft, most of the battery consumption isn't CPU
- andybak 12y ago
  People did side by side comparisons on the Nexus 9 and the encryption made a huge difference: http://www.androidauthority.com/nexus-6-device-encryption-performance-568629/ http://www.androidauthority.com/nexus-6-device-encryption-pe... http://www.reddit.com/r/nexus6/comments/2mufbm/huge_improvement_on_benchmark_scored_after/ http://www.reddit.com/r/nexus6/comments/2mufbm/huge_improvem...
vidyesh 12y ago
Fixed your link http://www.androidpolice.com/2014/11/20/anandtech-posts-side-by-side-nand-performance-for-nexus-6-encrypted-vs-unencrypted-its-not-pretty/ http://www.androidpolice.com/2014/11/20/anandtech-posts-side...
MichaelGG 12y ago
But the article shows that Google just made FDE a "SHOULD" and a "RECOMMEND" for OEMs. And the Nexus 6 supposedly does ship encrypted. It's just new phones coming out aren't, because OEMs aren't forced to. As an actual product line, Google seems to have mismanaged Android pretty terribly, sorta like MS did with Windows for a long while. From a get-it-in-tons-of-peoples-hands, I suppose it's OK that each OEM can ship a messed up version that's an unknown quantity for consumers.

magicalist 12y ago

Also from the comments, ARMv8 requires AES instructions, so having the drivers around won't be a problem in the future. This appears true from the ARMv8-A docs, but can someone more knowledgeable confirm this? Supposedly this is why the Nexus 9 (which is ARMv8-A) does have default encryption and suffers no performance hit.

mschuster91 12y ago
> Also from the comments, ARMv8 requires AES instructions Just random guessing around (I have no actual knowledge)... if the mentioned encryption drivers are required for performant cryptography, then it is likely that the encryption is done by a separate core/chip/soc module, totally transparent to the CPU and maybe also battery-saving.
- ethbro 12y ago
  If so, I imagine it would also fit nicely with big.LITTLE designs.
- magicalist 12y ago
  Right, sorry, I think the claim is that since ARMv8 requires AES instructions, it no longer needs separate encryption hardware, and the proof is that the Nexus 9 supposedly doesn't have the encryption performance hit that the Nexus 6 does. Native instructions would also require one less closed-source driver, which is also a win.

nly 12y ago

Seems weak to me. I doubt the cipher latency is noticeable even if done in well-optimised software. How much I/O to flash does a phone, once booted, really do anyway? There may be a battery life argument...but pfft, most of the battery consumption isn't CPU

andybak 12y ago
People did side by side comparisons on the Nexus 9 and the encryption made a huge difference: http://www.androidauthority.com/nexus-6-device-encryption-performance-568629/ http://www.androidauthority.com/nexus-6-device-encryption-pe... http://www.reddit.com/r/nexus6/comments/2mufbm/huge_improvement_on_benchmark_scored_after/ http://www.reddit.com/r/nexus6/comments/2mufbm/huge_improvem...

vidyesh 12y ago

Fixed your link http://www.androidpolice.com/2014/11/20/anandtech-posts-side-by-side-nand-performance-for-nexus-6-encrypted-vs-unencrypted-its-not-pretty/ http://www.androidpolice.com/2014/11/20/anandtech-posts-side...

MichaelGG 12y ago

But the article shows that Google just made FDE a "SHOULD" and a "RECOMMEND" for OEMs. And the Nexus 6 supposedly does ship encrypted. It's just new phones coming out aren't, because OEMs aren't forced to. As an actual product line, Google seems to have mismanaged Android pretty terribly, sorta like MS did with Windows for a long while. From a get-it-in-tons-of-peoples-hands, I suppose it's OK that each OEM can ship a messed up version that's an unknown quantity for consumers.