[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+TsHUBcxFz_O_dvnh5kFqenDYJVSf7jXGR39O6uDw2jjWsu0Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2012 22:59:29 +0530
From: Sayantan Datta <std2048@...il.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Varous experimental OpenCL commits
Hi magnum,
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 6:33 AM, magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> wrote:
> Claudio, Sayantan, all
>
> I have committed a couple patches that are somewhat experimental:
>
>
> 1. A patch that adds an "opencl_process_event()" function in
> common-opencl.c, that can be called from within an iterated format's
> split-kernel loop. This makes for swift response to key presses as well as
> proper session-saving in time, as discussed in another thread. The
> "pseudo-code patch" now is this simple for any format:
>
> void crypt_all(int count)
> {
> enqueue(Transfer);
> enqueue(RarInitKernel);
> for (i=0; i<HASH_LOOPS; i++)
> {
> enqueue(RarLoopKernel);
> + clFinish();
> + opencl_process_event();
> }
> enqueue(RarFinalKernel);
>
>
Is it necessary to include clFinish() inside the loop to ensure proper
functioning of opencl_process_event() ?
Regards,
Sayantan
Content of type "text/html" skipped
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.
