[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKGDhHX80khhY6v4yrwYUtFHBeB_z3m37GrKnx_D6+L1tPwxWA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2015 00:08:29 +0200
From: Agnieszka Bielec <bielecagnieszka8@...il.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: PHC: yescrypt on GPU
2015-07-23 4:00 GMT+02:00 Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>:
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 01:33:26AM +0200, magnum wrote:
>> On 2015-07-23 00:36, Agnieszka Bielec wrote:
>> >has anyone idea why copying parts of memory from __global to __private
>> >makes my code slower when there are different passwords and faster
>> >where all passwords are the same?
>
> Why faster for same passwords:
>
> This is puzzling, but my guess (which could well be wrong) is that the
> remaining global memory accesses have better locality of reference
> (resulting in better cache hit rate) and/or coalescing potential than
> all of them did before you moved some to private memory. In other
> words, you moved the "bad" ones to private and kept the "good" ones in
> global. But they are only "good" when the passwords are the same (and I
> guess the salts as well, or there are few different ones), so this is of
> no practical use.
>
> Why slower for different passwords:
>
> I guess your LWS or/and GWS became lower.
>
>> >I did in lyra2 something very
>> >similar, maybe my code is too big and I have to do split kernels?
>
> Split kernel may be good anyway, but this is most likely unrelated to
> this specific occasion.
>
>> Are there differences in length distribution in the two cases?
>
> This should be irrelevant. The PHC finalists process the plaintext
> password into a hash early on, and do not use the plaintext password
> frequently. They are not like e.g. md5crypt in this respect.
>
>> If not,
>> Maybe in the slow case they end up spilling to local memory due to
>> harder register pressure.
>
> Maybe. This is a possibility with any changes to a kernel.
I had in my code
for()
{
copy to private
some operiations on private
copy to global
}
i changed this code to
memset(this private array,0,size of private array)//because I noticed
when I was working on parallel that kernel can slow down after using
uninitialized array
for()
{
some operations on private
}
and runned with --skip-self-test and speed was the same, even without
this memset. this is big array 8KB but I have in another place copying
64 B and this also decreases speed even when copying 8KB is turned off
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.
