Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 25 May 2015 11:39:13 +0800
From: Lei Zhang <zhanglei.april@...il.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: interleaving in SHA256 & SHA512


> On May 24, 2015, at 11:14 AM, Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> wrote:
> 
> Yes, but please don't give up so soon.  Here's a test to perform:
> compare the speeds with and without interleaving (and with different
> factors) when running just one thread (OMP_NUM_THREADS=1 or/and a
> non-OpenMP build).  Obviously, all of them will be low in absolute
> terms, and all will use this one core suboptimally (since running fewer
> than max threads on it), but we need to know whether interleaving
> achieves relative speedup in that test or not.  It should, even if it
> does not achieve a speedup when running multiple threads per core.
> Whether a relative speedup is seen in this test or not may affect our
> next steps.

Here's a re-test with a non-OpenMP build:

On well:
SHA256, pwsafe
[x1]
Raw:	11232 c/s real, 11232 c/s virtual
[x2]
Raw:	9552 c/s real, 9552 c/s virtual
[x4]
Raw:	9024 c/s real, 9024 c/s virtual
[x8]
Raw:	10392 c/s real, 10496 c/s virtual

SHA512, saph
[x1]
Many salts:	1108 c/s real, 1120 c/s virtual
Only one salt:	1108 c/s real, 1098 c/s virtual
[x2]
Many salts:	1008 c/s real, 1008 c/s virtual
Only one salt:	1008 c/s real, 1008 c/s virtual
[x4]
Many salts:	847 c/s real, 847 c/s virtual
Only one salt:	855 c/s real, 855 c/s virtual
[x8]
(core dump)

On MIC:
SHA256, pwsafe
[x1]
Raw:    1129 c/s real, 1129 c/s virtual
[x2]
Raw:    878 c/s real, 878 c/s virtual
[x4]
Raw:    932 c/s real, 932 c/s virtual
[x8]
Raw:    878 c/s real, 878 c/s virtual

SHA512, saph
[x1]
Many salts:     12.6 c/s real, 25.3 c/s virtual
Only one salt:  12.6 c/s real, 25.3 c/s virtual
[x2]
Many salts:     33.5 c/s real, 33.5 c/s virtual
Only one salt:  33.3 c/s real, 33.3 c/s virtual
[x4]
Many salts:     19.7 c/s real, 19.7 c/s virtual
Only one salt:  19.6 c/s real, 19.6 c/s virtual

*** glibc detected *** run/john: free(): invalid next size (normal): 0x0000000001d13630 ***
*** glibc detected *** run/john: malloc(): memory corruption (fast): 0x0000000001d13740 ***

[x8]
Many salts:     9.4 c/s real, 9.4 c/s virtual
Only one salt:  9.4 c/s real, 9.4 c/s virtual

*** glibc detected *** run/john: free(): invalid next size (normal): 0x0000000003231630 ***
*** glibc detected *** run/john: malloc(): memory corruption (fast): 0x0000000003231740 ***


I think there's some memory bug in saph or somewhere else. I'm still investigating it.


Lei



[ CONTENT OF TYPE text/html SKIPPED ]

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Your e-mail address:

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