[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP4313B389AACE48631065278FDE30@phx.gbl>
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2012 23:51:57 +0200
From: Frank Dittrich <frank_dittrich@...mail.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Some relbench results for linux-x86-sse2 (jumbo5 vs.
upcoming jumbo6)
On 06/23/2012 11:37 PM, Solar Designer wrote:
> Frank,
>
> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 11:11:09PM +0200, Frank Dittrich wrote:
>> And these are the worst regressions:
>> $ ./relbench -v j5-sse2-mod.txt j6-sse2.txt|grep "^Ratio:"|cut -f
>> 2-|sort -n|head -n 10
> ...
>> 0.61111 real, 0.61111 virtual MediaWiki md5($s.'-'.md5($p)):Many salts
>> 0.87012 real, 0.87891 virtual phpass MD5 ($P$9):Raw
> ...
>> 0.88684 real, 0.89589 virtual MySQL:Raw
> ...
>> 0.90846 real, 0.90857 virtual dynamic_27: FreeBSD MD5:Raw
>> 0.91026 real, 0.91026 virtual Generic salted MD4:Many salts
>> 0.92756 real, 0.92756 virtual dynamic_0: md5($p) (raw-md5):Raw
>
> Can you post the actual output for these (for both versions)?
I'll attach 3 files with benchmark output, the j6 one (current git),and
two j5 (original and modified by benchmark-unify).
UPDATE: I had to compress them to educe the size.
> Are these regressions fully reproducible if you re-run both versions?
I just tried the first two, they are fully reproducible.
At least for MediaWiki, I suspect JimF's patches to support
--regen-lost-salts, but I may be wrong.
> What make target did you use? linux-x86-sse2 or linux-x86-sse2i?
sse2, without OMP.
I intended to add more benchmarks, but I thought I better try this with
x86-64 on my Laptop with an i7-2820QM CPU @ 2.30GHz.
Frank
Download attachment "benchmarks-x86-sse.tgz" of type "application/x-gzip" (7667 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
