Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 08:32:48 +0100 From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: New plugin load order magic On 11 Jan, 2013, at 8:26 , magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> wrote: > On 11 Jan, 2013, at 8:15 , Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 04:43:13PM -0200, Claudio Andr? wrote: >>> Em 10-01-2013 06:05, magnum escreveu: >>>> >>>> Very strange. This indicates init() is called for at least two formats. >>>> Why would that happen for --show? >>> >>> Init is called for all formats inside the pw file. Despite of this, >>> things seems to be ok (need to check formats tested when the error >>> happened). >>> >>> BTW: is the opencl stuff desired for --show? >> >> No, it is not. Looks like we need to patch loader.c to avoid calling >> init() for --show. > > I was just considering reverting my patch for now. I tried to follow loader.c but I don't see where it calls init (it does not happen in loader.c). > > Also, does the conventions allow calling binary() without calling init()? Not that I know of any format that would have any problems with that. This is in formats.h: /* Initializes the algorithm's internal structures; valid() prepare() and split() * are the only methods that are allowed to be called before a call to init(). * Note that initializing an algorithm might de-initialize some others (if * a shared underlying resource is used). */ Although we can most likely change the convention to include binary() with no changes to current code. 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.