Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2013 00:29:05 +0200 From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: formats that duplicate dynamics Cool, I forgot about the lack of SSE2 in postgres. So our only problem is that if we drop the postgres format and start using dynamic, Dhiru's ettercap patch will again be obsolete and if we submit a third patch with a third tag, the ettercap maintainers might start to think we are idiots. That could be solved with a thin format though. magnum On 22 Apr, 2013, at 23:57 , jfoug <jfoug@....net> wrote: > here are some quick/dirty timings. > > $ ../run/john -test=5 -form=postgres > Benchmarking: PostgreSQL MD5 challenge-response [32/32]... (8xOMP) DONE > Raw: 4860K c/s real, 1548K c/s virtual > > $ OMP_NUM_THREADS=1 ../run/john -test=5 -form=dynamic_1015 > Benchmarking: dynamic_1015 md5(md5($p.$u).$s) [128/128 SSE2 intrinsics > 480x4x3]... DONE > Many salts: 8669K c/s real, 8696K c/s virtual > Only one salt: 7435K c/s real, 7432K c/s virtual > > Benchmarking: dynamic_1015 md5(md5($p.$u).$s) [128/128 SSE2 intrinsics > 480x4x3]... (4xOMP) DONE > Many salts: 26749K c/s real, 7654K c/s virtual > Only one salt: 16951K c/s real, 6915K c/s virtual > > So even non-OMP 'unstable', 1015 should much faster than postgres format, on > any reasonable build, simply due to SSE2 > > Jim. > > From: magnum Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 15:12 >> A caveat is that postgres supports OMP while dynamic does not, in unstable. >> >> Bleeding's dynamic does support OMP now though (thanks, Jim!), so this > alternative will become increasingly attractive as this support matures. In > bleeding I think we should start to get rid of thick formats that can be > done with dynamic (and/or a thin format) unless they are significantly > faster than dynamic. >> >> 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.