[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <37ccab0c43015490d59faddebd0e281a@smtp.hushmail.com>
Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2014 06:44:05 +0100
From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: CUDA multi-device support
On 2014-01-07 04:11, Muhammad Junaid Muzammil wrote:
> I am still not sure what was the issue with pull request as I think I
> sent a pull request for bleeding-jumbo branch. Will take a look at this.
It was from your bleeding-jumbo - but you accidentally targeted my
unstable-jumbo branch (for various reasons that's unfortunately the
default). But since it was correct in your fork, I could just reject the
PR and cherry-pick them instead without trouble.
Always review your commits (use git gui and stage a hunk at a time as
opposed to a blind "git add -a ." and always review things like PRs,
traditional patches etcetera. If you look at
https://github.com/magnumripper/JohnTheRipper/pull/469 you can
immediately see that something is wrong. Example (top row): "junmuz
wants to merge 2,815 commits into magnumripper:unstable-jumbo from
junmuz:bleeding-jumbo" ;-)
Anyway, the patches themselves was good. We'll tweak some edge cases
(eg. warn when MAX_CUDA_DEVICES get in the way, not silently skip some
devices). Also, I think for CUDA we shold default to *all* devices as
opposed to device 0. Anyone disagree? Doing the same to OpenCL is more
questionable - unless we limit it to GPUs and accelerators (with
fallback to CPUs if that's all there is).
BTW do you actually have any/some/unlimited access to a machine with
more than one [logical] CUDA device? I think fixing pwsafe requires
that. Unfortunately Solar's test machines can't provide this yet.
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.
