Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 19:24:35 +0400 From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: md5 hash comparisons myrice, Sayantan - On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 10:00:21PM -0700, Myrice Li wrote: > I have bitmaps in both local memory and global memory. It works as follows: > 1. if loaded hashes number exceeds a threshold, it will use larger mask > 0xFFFFFF for hash table lookup and global bitmaps > 2. otherwise, it will use 0xFFFF for hash table lookup and local memory > bitmaps. OK. Yet 0xFFFFFF won't be large enough with many millions of hashes loaded. > I think I use 2K*4 bitmaps in local memory IIRC, it was 8 KiB * 4. > for hash number smaller than > 6553. For each portion of bitmaps, it actually has 2K(int)*4*8 = 64K bit. Oh, you meant 2K ints, not 2 KiB. Then we're in agreement. > That is what I think Sayantan claims that "64K loaded hash seems fit into > local memory". But this is not true, For loaded hashes exceeds 6553(1/10 of > 64K), it will use global memory bitmaps. Sayantan was not referring to your code at all. Thanks, Alexander
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.