[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BLU159-W145DE15FB9B5369CE8BF65A48D0@phx.gbl>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 13:44:35 +0000
From: Alex Sicamiotis <alekshs@...mail.com>
To: <john-users@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: RE: DES with OpenMP
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 09:35:26PM +0000, Alex Sicamiotis wrote:
> > > ...the OMP version is scoring +200k in many salts over the noOMP despite threads=1,
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> > > when it should be equal.
> >
> > No, it should not. It should be close, but not equal. Normally, OpenMP
> > build running with 1 thread is slightly slower than non-OpenMP build,
> > but it can also be the other way around. The code is different in many
> > ways. Even the chunk size (number of passwords being hashed per
> > crypt_all() call) differs by a factor of 32 between these builds.
> > Normally, this hurts performance when you don't actually run multiple
> > threads, but in certain builds and on certain machines it can be the
> > other way around as you have seen.
> >
I was looking now at the john.log, and for openMP 2 threads it was
0:00:00:00 - Candidate passwords will be buffered and tried in chunks of 8192
for openMP 1 thread it was
0:00:11:32 - Candidate passwords will be buffered and tried in chunks of 4096
and for non-openMP it was
0:00:11:38 - Candidate passwords will be buffered and tried in chunks of 128
...and I remembered what you said about this code difference. So.. supposing this can give, say +200k c/s which I'm seeing between the openmp and non-openmp, where do I tweak the code to test various values?
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.
