[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3119ceccf650c81ea60b977119212eb2@smtp.hushmail.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2012 09:25:50 +0100
From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: New self-test for maximum length
On 31 Dec, 2012, at 8:56 , Frank Dittrich <frank_dittrich@...mail.com> wrote:
> On 12/31/2012 07:04 AM, magnum wrote:
>> On 31 Dec, 2012, at 4:48 , Dhiru Kholia <dhiru.kholia@...il.com> wrote:
>>> On Monday 31 December 2012 02:14 AM, magnum wrote:
>>>> On 30 Dec, 2012, at 18:11 , Dhiru Kholia <dhiru.kholia@...il.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Sunday 30 December 2012 10:26 PM, magnum wrote:
>>>>>> Benchmarking: Clipperz SRP SHA256 [32/64 oSSL-exp]... (8xOMP) FAILED (get_hash[0](6))
> [...]
>>> 1. Are we using non-thread safe OpenSSL functions in this format? OpenSSL could be breaking OMP builds (just guessing).
>>
>> That's it, commenting out the OMP pragma fixes the problem.
>
> What if you enable OMP again, but use OMP_NUM_THREADS=1?
That also works fine. Something is not thread-safe.
The weirdest thing is that the new self-test triggers the bug. Revert formats.c to fa9e405 and problem completely disappears. I really can't see why. That self-test calls set_key() with maximum length keys followed by get_key(), nothing else.
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.
