[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c670ad2b2a884f388ed4f34af4012ce3@smtp.hushmail.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 11:35:39 +0100
From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Response during OpenCL sessions
On 19 Dec, 2012, at 2:10 , magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> wrote:
> On 19 Dec, 2012, at 1:53 , magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> wrote:
>> It seems it actually does not work on Bull, regardless of GPU used. The status is still delayed until crypt_all() has finished, as if the clFinish() was optimised away.
>
> It doesn't work under Linux on this machine either. Now I'm really confused. Why is this? Maybe clFinish() actually *is* optimised away? Would that not violate the spec?
Some sleep did the trick. I had this #ifdef in my earliest experiments but forgot about it this time. This code works:
void crypt_all(int count)
{
enqueue(Transfer);
enqueue(RarInitKernel);
for (i=0; i<HASH_LOOPS; i++)
{
enqueue(RarLoopKernel);
+ #if !OS_TIMER
+ sig_timer_emu_tick();
+ #endif
+ clFinish();
+ if (event_pending)
+ process_event();
}
enqueue(RarFinalKernel);
I will apply this to various formats and check for regressions.
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.
