Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2012 18:14:09 +0200 From: Tavis Ormandy <taviso@...xchg8b.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: [patch] optional new raw sha1 implemetation On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 07:27:53PM +0400, Solar Designer wrote: > Tavis, > > Thanks again for your contribution! > > On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 04:54:15PM +0200, Tavis Ormandy wrote: > > The code is original, I can assign copright to Solar if required. > > My current preference is that contributors retain copyright, but license > their contributions under cut-down BSD license as given here: > > http://openwall.info/wiki/john/licensing > > This ensures that both the original author and JtR maintainers are able > to combine the code with almost anything else. (It also happens to let > third-parties reuse the code, including in proprietary products.) > > Can you do that, please? Yes, OK. > Some notes on the actual code (although I haven't fully read it yet, and > I might not): > > The SSE4.1 trick could be handy for vectorizing DES_bs_cmp_all(), > although it is non-obvious whether that would provide any speedup over > the current non-vectorized version even with that trick. Thank you for > bringing it to us for possible reuse. ;-) It performs pretty well on intel, I don't know if it will be worth it for AMD hardware. > 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. Yes, it should be much much faster if it's that close already...that's encouraging. I don't have any AMD hardware easily available to test, but I can do AVX, although it might have to wait until next week unless someone else wants to try it :-) (I can help with hints if someone else wants to try). > The file taviso_fmt.c should probably be renamed. I don't mind it > including "taviso" if you like, but it should also include "sha1". I don't mind, it was just what I called my working copy. how about sha1_ng_fmt? Whatever you prefer is fine. > The format label rawsha1_sse4 should probably be renamed because there's > no hard dependency on SSE4.1 anymore. Sure, any suggestions? > Thanks again, > > Alexander -- ------------------------------------- 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.