Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2012 17:38:01 +0200
From: magnum <>
Subject: Re: [patch] optional new raw sha1 implemetation

On 2012-06-17 17:31, Solar Designer wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 07:27:53PM +0400, Solar Designer wrote:
>> There's currently no speedup on XOP:
>> user@...l:~/john/magnum-jumbo-cpu3/src$ ../run/john -te -fo=rawsha1_sse4
>> Benchmarking: Raw SHA-1 [taviso sse4]... DONE
>> Raw:    21591K c/s real, 21591K c/s virtual
>> user@...l:~/john/magnum-jumbo-cpu3/src$ ../run/john -te -fo=raw-sha1
>> Benchmarking: Raw SHA-1 [SSE2i 8x]... DONE
>> Raw:    23513K c/s real, 23751K c/s virtual
>> (This is a linux-x86-64-xop build.)  I guess some speedup can be
>> achieved by adding use of XOP intrinsics into your new code - that is,
>> it should become faster than 23.5M c/s then.
> BTW, I've just checked that -mxop implies SSE4.1, so the above should
> have used the SSE4.1 trick in Tavis' code.

I built with the -native target so I should have got the same speed as 
you for Simon's format. But 22600K is the best I get from the 
fluctuations. Any idea why? Is an -xop build different in some way?


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.