Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 02:10:37 +0100
From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Response during OpenCL sessions

On 19 Dec, 2012, at 1:53 , magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> wrote:
> On 19 Dec, 2012, at 0:24 , magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> wrote:
>> void crypt_all(int count)
>> {
>> 	enqueue(Transfer);
>> 	enqueue(RarInitKernel);
>> 	for (i=0; i<HASH_LOOPS; i++)
>> 	{
>> 		enqueue(RarLoopKernel);
>> +  		clFinish();
>> +  		if (event_pending)
>> +  			process_event();
>> 	}
>> 	enqueue(RarFinalKernel);
>> 
>> This works like a champ - but has a slight performance impact. For wpapsk on Tahiti, speed 
> 
> It seems it actually does not work on Bull, regardless of GPU used. The status is still delayed until crypt_all() has finished, as if the clFinish() was optimised away.
> 
> On my OSX laptop, I get status output within one second, using the exact same code. What could be the reason it does not work on Bull? I think I'll reboot my laptop into Linux and see what happens...

It doesn't work under Linux on this machine either. Now I'm really confused. Why is this? Maybe clFinish() actually *is* optimised away? Would that not violate the spec?

magnum

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Your e-mail address:

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux - Powered by OpenVZ