[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a069d652bb829602864c871221a76f4b@smtp.hushmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 08:37:01 +0100
From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: interleaved bitslice? (was: bitslice MD*/SHA*, AVX2)
On 2015-03-11 21:55, Solar Designer wrote:
> solar@...l:~/md5slice$ gcc md5slice.c -o md5slice -Wall -s -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -DVECTOR -march=native
>
> This gave "warning: always_inline function might not be inlinable" about
> FF(), I(), H(), F(), add32r(), add32c(), add32() - but then it built
> fine. The speed is:
Solar,
While experimenting with this I noticed using a vector size of 32 but
still compiling for AVX gave a slight boost (~5%). I assume this ends up
similar to the interleaving we use in Jumbo, and is faster for the same
reasons.
When trying that with a vector size of 64, I trigger an ICE.
md5slice.c: In function 'II.constprop':
md5slice.c:331:27: internal compiler error: in emit_move_insn, at
expr.c:3609
static MAYBE_INLINE3 void II(a, b, c, d, x, s, ac)
^
md5slice.c:331:27: internal compiler error: Abort trap: 6
gcc: internal compiler error: Abort trap: 6 (program cc1)
That's with gcc-4.9.2 on OSX and it happens with -mavx2 too. I get a
similar but not identical ICE on well. Maybe this should be reported.
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.
