[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <63fc6759c054cb3725b04e2907f9e657@smtp.hushmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 01:06:08 +0200
From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: OpenCL kernel max running time vs. "ASIC hang"
On 2012-06-26 00:27, Solar Designer wrote:
> I discussed this matter with Bit Weasil on IRC a few days ago.
> According to him, we shouldn't be trying to spend more than 200 ms per
> OpenCL kernel invocation, or we'll face random "ASIC hang" issues on AMD
> cards (not only on 7970 - in fact, Bit Weasil is playing with 6000
> series cards mostly). Apparently, if a kernel runs fine for 500 ms on
> one occasion (or even on 100 occasions in a row), that does not mean it
> won't "ASIC hang" on another occasion - but by reducing that to<= 200 ms,
> things become reliable. (That's how I understood Bit Weasil.)
That's not an easy goal with slow formats. For RAR, with 256K rounds of
SHA-1, I currently don't get much below 2000ms on 7790, and that's with
GWS that produces a 40% slower c/s than what we currently use. For best
c/s we exceed 9 seconds. Then again, my code is made by a newbie. Making
it 10x faster would be nice for sure. But even Milen said his RAR kernel
ran for 2-3 seconds a while ago.
magnum
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.
