[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150916190513.GA12469@openwall.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 22:05:13 +0300
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: jumbo startup time (was: ldr_split_line() performance regression)
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 11:31:37AM +0200, magnum wrote:
> Using -w=/dev/null it's 715 ms and using a build with -DDYNAMIC_DISABLED
> it's less than half: 317 ms. I have noticed that various dynamic
> initializations always come at top when profiling a short run that in no
> way involves dynamic. Some of them look very strange, like 10,000
> iterations of stuff... heck, are we brute forcing digits?
Not sure if related, but here's what I am getting for:
time ./john -w=/dev/null -format=dummy pw
where "pw" contains one $dummy$ line. 1.8.0 release:
real 0m0.076s
user 0m0.003s
sys 0m0.009s
jumbo:
real 0m0.300s
user 0m0.132s
sys 0m0.120s
Same machine.
I understand that some of the extra delay comes from jumbo being larger
and linked against more libraries (although it's a non-OpenCL, non-CUDA
build here), but it's not only that.
Please profile/optimize this. And also the case where no --format
option is given and the file has non-negligible size.
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.
