[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+EaD-aEk=-qF=0_7sAFoyLVVaTM=mHNcXsgokyv9ojFjGTamw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 19:40:17 +0200
From: Katja Malvoni <kmalvoni@...il.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Parallella: bcrypt
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 7:17 PM, Katja Malvoni <kmalvoni@...il.com> wrote:
> [..]
>
> This is good news, but I suspect there was some error in your
>> measurements, or if no error then we don't know why the computation
>> prior to the main loop is taking 2.5 ms. This 2.5 ms is excessive
>> (should be several times less than that). I suspect that you measured
>> communication time as part of it, or maybe it's so slow because it
>> involves reads from off-chip memory?
>>
>
> I was surprised by that as well, I measured it again, 2.5 ms. I'm
> measuring clock ticks with Epiphany timers (assuming 600 MHz), I start
> timer after declarations in BF_crypt and I stop it before entering do{ ...
> }while(--count);
> I was passing pointers to shared buffer when calling BF_crypt(), I tried
> copying data from shared buffer into local variables, it's even slower -
> 809 c/s
>
>
It comes from copying initial S box to data structure in BF_crypt() (takes
around 2.3 ms). If S box is not copied than it must be transferred before
each BF_crypt call. Initial S box is transferred when loading *.srec file.
I think this is cheaper than transferring it from host to Epiphany per
every computed hash.
Katja
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.
