Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 21:16:21 +0200 From: Frank Dittrich <frank_dittrich@...mail.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: relbench/benchmark-unify On 08/19/2013 09:07 PM, Frank Dittrich wrote: > Other format names that might need to be reviewed if relbench -v output > should still print reasonable format names and if we want to avoid > different C/R formats being wrongly detected as different > implementations of the same algorithm (or if we want to be able to > compare CPU implementations and GPU implementations): [...] > PBKDF2-HMAC-SHA256-opencl, OpenCL > PBKDF2-HMAC-SHA256, rounds=12000 > PBKDF2-HMAC-SHA512, GRUB2 / OS X 10.8 Sorry, PBKDF2-HMAC-SHA512 really is different. > I hope my comments made some sense, and Solar hadn't something > completely different in mind. May be if FORMAT_NAME is defined and contains FORMAT_LABEL at offset 0, we don't print FORMAT_LABEL in --test output? And may be, in --list=format-details and --list=format-all-details we should print FORMAT_LABEL as the format name if FORMAT_NAME is empty. Frank
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.