Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 02:49:18 +0400
From: Solar Designer <>
Subject: Re: relbench and changed format names

On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 12:37:08AM +0200, Frank Dittrich wrote:
> These are the format names:
> $ ./john --list=format-details |cut -f 7|sort |uniq -c|grep -v "^ *1 "
>       2 MySQL
>       2 NT MD4
>       2 Raw SHA-1
> These are the format labels:
> mysql-fast
> mysql
> nt
> nt2
> raw-sha1
> raw-sha1-ng

Thanks.  I think we should patch these by moving the " (label
mysql-fast)" and the like into FORMAT_NAME.

> Benchmarking: MySQL [32/32 (label mysql-fast)]... DONE

Will be:

MySQL (label mysql-fast)

> Benchmarking: MySQL [32/32 (label mysql)]... DONE

MySQL (label mysql)

> Benchmarking: NT MD4 [128/128 SSE2 + 32/32]... DONE

NT MD4 (label nt)

> Benchmarking: NT MD4 [128/128 SSE2 intrinsics 12x]... DONE

NT MD4 (label nt2)

> Benchmarking: Raw SHA-1 [128/128 SSE2 intrinsics 8x]... DONE

Raw SHA-1 (label raw-sha1)

> Benchmarking: Raw SHA-1 [128/128 SSE2 intrinsics 4x]... DONE

Raw SHA-1 (label raw-sha1-ng)

In fact, should we possibly unify these label names - e.g., consistently
use the "-ng" suffix on the newer and faster implementations?

For MySQL, is there any reason to keep the non-fast implementation in
the tree at all?  If not, then let's move it to unused/ and rename
mysql-fast to just mysql (and not mention the label then).


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.