[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130727152435.GE27483@openwall.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 19:24:35 +0400
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: md5 hash comparisons
myrice, Sayantan -
On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 10:00:21PM -0700, Myrice Li wrote:
> I have bitmaps in both local memory and global memory. It works as follows:
> 1. if loaded hashes number exceeds a threshold, it will use larger mask
> 0xFFFFFF for hash table lookup and global bitmaps
> 2. otherwise, it will use 0xFFFF for hash table lookup and local memory
> bitmaps.
OK. Yet 0xFFFFFF won't be large enough with many millions of hashes
loaded.
> I think I use 2K*4 bitmaps in local memory
IIRC, it was 8 KiB * 4.
> for hash number smaller than
> 6553. For each portion of bitmaps, it actually has 2K(int)*4*8 = 64K bit.
Oh, you meant 2K ints, not 2 KiB. Then we're in agreement.
> That is what I think Sayantan claims that "64K loaded hash seems fit into
> local memory". But this is not true, For loaded hashes exceeds 6553(1/10 of
> 64K), it will use global memory bitmaps.
Sayantan was not referring to your code at all.
Thanks,
Alexander
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.
