[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <45d0f98539971ee355aba047ab19ec2f@smtp.hushmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2015 01:11:03 +0200
From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: LWS and GWS auto-tuning
On 2015-08-27 01:07, Solar Designer wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 01:01:27AM +0200, magnum wrote:
>> Max Work Group Size: 8192 <---- here!
>> Parallel compute cores: 8
>>
>> I'm do not think the de-facto limit of 1024 we've been used to is an
>> actual maximum per any specifications. Also, when I tried this it ran
>> just fine through the tests up to 8192 but picked a lower number as
>> best. If it wasn't actually supported, we should get an
>> CL_INVALID_WORK_GROUP_SIZE error and it would have been caught and
>> handled properly.
>>
>> I presume your segfault was unrelated to the work size.
>
> OK. There was also "OpenCL error (CL_INVALID_VALUE) in file
> (opencl_cryptmd5_fmt_plug.c) at line (381) - (Copy data back)".
>
> Are you going to look into these, or/and create GitHub Issues so they
> are not forgotten?
That is already fixed (handled) by today's changes. If you get a
segfault running edfc502630 or later, I will regard it a problem.
So I'm not opening issues just yet, but I am regression testing here and
there :-)
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.
