Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 11:07:43 +0200 From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: bf-opencl fails self-test on CPU On 18 Oct, 2012, at 4:38 , Sayantan Datta <std2048@...il.com> wrote: > HI magnum, > > On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 2:49 AM, magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> wrote: > Just try it. Usually it's increadibly simple to add vectorizing. Most of my formats run vectorized on CPU and non-GCN AMD, and scalar on nvidia & GCN. Just a few #ifdefs. > > I always use uint4 or ulong4 (even though those end up in different size). I think once you use eg. uint4 instead of uint, the auto vectorizer may change that to other vector sizes automatically if/when beneficial. That is much less magic than auto vectorization of scalar code. > > I guess you mean I should vectorize the private arrays that have a compile time constant indexing. Is it worthwhile to vectorize the arrays stored in global memory /local memory ? For blowfish I don't have much private arrays with compile time constant indexing. So I made a new kernel that process two hash together using uint2 vectors. I will later try processing four of them together using uint4. I'm not familiar with BF at all. Maybe it's harder than ususal to vectorize. And I have absolutely no idea if it will be beneficial or not. There is no SSE2 support in the CPU format, right? magnum Content of type "text/html" skipped
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.