Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2012 21:30:27 +0200 From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: common find_best_workgroup() On 2012-07-05 19:56, magnum wrote: > I reverted this change (using a shared find_best_workgroup() ) for > opencl_xsha512_fmt.c because it had a "special" loop in its local one: > it runs each size 10 times and sums the exec time. And its performance > got worse (selecting a lower LWS) with the shared one. > > This gave me this idea (to-do) for the shared one: > > 1. perform a warm-up run of crypt_all() before the loop, but check the > exec time. > 2. From that exec time, chose a suitable number of loops (targeting a > minimum sum of exec times) > 3. Do wot myrice did, using that number of loops. > > This might greatly reduce the "randomness" I have experienced with > find_best(). And when this is implemented, opencl_xsha512_fmt.c can get > on this train too again :) I did the above. Seem to work fine, and xsha512-opencl now uses the shared function without regression. magnum
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.