Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    23.09d - Is QAT Broken?

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Plus 23.09 Development Snapshots (Retired)
    86 Posts 10 Posters 17.2k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • B
      bcdouglas @marcosm
      last edited by

      @marcosm said in 23.09d - Is QAT Broken?:

      @RobbieTT said in 23.09d - Is QAT Broken?:

      @jimp said in 23.09d - Is QAT Broken?:

      The man page is not complete/accurate there.

      I didn't stand a chance. Back to the cup of tea.

      ☕️

      There are many nuances indeed! It's a good discussion to have, and the civil approach is appreciated :)

      Yes, thank you for a civil discussion @marcosm and @stephenw10. I don't know why these conversations often become aggressive with users trying to provide input to netgate. Thanks @marcosm and @stephenw10 .

      RobbieTTR 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • RobbieTTR
        RobbieTT @bcdouglas
        last edited by RobbieTT

        @bcdouglas
        Sounds like I am being admonished; if so I will take it on the chin. It was not my intent to cause waves but clearly something unintended was triggered.

        As users we don't always have the technical language for this kind of discourse but all I can say is that I did my best to read-into the topic to try and understand the apparent changes or limitations, only to find gaps in the documentation.

        Threads such as this may put-off others from providing feedback but it shouldn't. Please set this aside and do comment when you think something does not make sense. Nothing can move forward without feedback.

        Anyway, I'll take the thumping on this one.

        B 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
        • stephenw10S
          stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
          last edited by

          I really don't think there was any issue here. Reading back I think there was a misunderstanding earlier on but in general this was a useful discussion. No admonishment required! 😉

          RobbieTTR 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 4
          • B
            bcdouglas @RobbieTT
            last edited by

            @RobbieTT Not from me. The conversations from the Netgate side often take a weird turn when users try to ask honest questions and help.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
            • D Djbower1 referenced this topic on
            • RobbieTTR
              RobbieTT @stephenw10
              last edited by

              @stephenw10

              No observable change in functionality with the newly-enabled QAT 200xx devices (tested on an Xeon D-1536NT with 23.09.b.20231020.0600 installed) from that of the C3xxx series on the same beta load.

              ☕️

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • stephenw10S
                stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                last edited by

                The change we made there should now recognise that device as QAT capable on the dashboard. It should also load the qat module if it's not already.
                However the driver itself already worked with the hardware so if it was loaded then the kernel could already use it for kernel mode crypto.

                RobbieTTR 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • RobbieTTR
                  RobbieTT @stephenw10
                  last edited by

                  @stephenw10
                  It does show correctly and I have provided feedback on issue #14844. 👍

                  ☕️

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                  • S sandie referenced this topic on
                  • NollipfSenseN
                    NollipfSense
                    last edited by NollipfSense

                    Interesting conversations, indeed. I hope that if I installed the QAT device that all need for it, whether kernel or user induced, would utilized the device...that's the reason for purchasing the device. I know in both 23.05.1 and 23.09 releases, the QAT driver takes almost 3 minutes to load on one of my boxes.

                    pfSense+ 23.09 Lenovo Thinkcentre M93P SFF Quadcore i7 dual Raid-ZFS 128GB-SSD 32GB-RAM PCI-Intel i350-t4 NIC, -Intel QAT 8950.
                    pfSense+ 23.09 VM-Proxmox, Dell Precision Xeon-W2155 Nvme 500GB-ZFS 128GB-RAM PCIe-Intel i350-t4, Intel QAT-8950, P-cloud.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                    • NollipfSenseN
                      NollipfSense @RobbieTT
                      last edited by NollipfSense

                      @RobbieTT said in 23.09d - Is QAT Broken?:

                      There is certainly little point leaving QAT idle when it could be put to use; well, in my view. QAT is one of things that attracted me to Netgate / pfSense+.

                      I agree and what also attracted me to plus as well and having it in two boxes.

                      pfSense+ 23.09 Lenovo Thinkcentre M93P SFF Quadcore i7 dual Raid-ZFS 128GB-SSD 32GB-RAM PCI-Intel i350-t4 NIC, -Intel QAT 8950.
                      pfSense+ 23.09 VM-Proxmox, Dell Precision Xeon-W2155 Nvme 500GB-ZFS 128GB-RAM PCIe-Intel i350-t4, Intel QAT-8950, P-cloud.

                      RobbieTTR 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • RobbieTTR
                        RobbieTT @NollipfSense
                        last edited by

                        Wendell has just posted this video on QAT and where it should be used:

                        qat:Speeding SSL with NGINX

                        Clearly I agree.

                        ☕️

                        NollipfSenseN 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • NollipfSenseN
                          NollipfSense @RobbieTT
                          last edited by

                          @RobbieTT said in 23.09d - Is QAT Broken?:

                          Wendell has just posted this video on QAT and where it should be used:

                          qat:Speeding SSL with NGINX

                          Clearly I agree.

                          ☕️

                          Right on...wished he had also test on FreeBSD...

                          pfSense+ 23.09 Lenovo Thinkcentre M93P SFF Quadcore i7 dual Raid-ZFS 128GB-SSD 32GB-RAM PCI-Intel i350-t4 NIC, -Intel QAT 8950.
                          pfSense+ 23.09 VM-Proxmox, Dell Precision Xeon-W2155 Nvme 500GB-ZFS 128GB-RAM PCIe-Intel i350-t4, Intel QAT-8950, P-cloud.

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • First post
                            Last post
                          Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.