[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 08:29:48 -0700
From: Tavis Ormandy <taviso@...xchg8b.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: --fork
Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> wrote:
> magnum, all -
>
> I've just pushed my --fork implementation to the public CVS repository.
> Please help test it, and merge it into bleeding.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Alexander
>
Hey Solar, if I understand correctly this skips the inc_key_loop step on
alternate nodes during do_inc_crack to distribute the work (similar in
concept, but less overhead than the parallel external mode).
e.g.
for (i = 0; i < n; i++) {
if (this_node % i == 0)
inc_key_loop()
}
I have an algorithm to skip to an arbitrary state in constant time without
having to increment it, would you be interested in a patch against core? I
guess it would be more invasive, but would save a lot of cycles (especially
on a large number of nodes).
I wrote about it here: http://www.openwall.com/lists/john-dev/2012/06/14/5
Tavis.
--
-------------------------------------
taviso@...xchg8b.com | pgp encrypted mail preferred
-------------------------------------------------------
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.
