Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 19:28:52 +0400 From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: bcrypt-parallella on 64-core (was: Katja's weekly report #13) On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 01:55:51PM +0100, Katja Malvoni wrote: > Another idea I have is to use local memory instead of external - with this > approach I would avoid external loads completely. Right, that's what you need to do in order to use all cores despite of external loads to some cores being broken. > But this approach failed > with E16 because stack would overwrite part of S-box in some cases. But > format would usually pass self test. I have that code somewhere so I'll > modify optimized code accordingly and try this approach, it might work (at > least for self test so that we can see performance). I think it should be fairly easy to avoid the stack overwrite issue. I think we didn't approach the full 32 KB usage closely enough for this to be a difficult problem. We're using 8 KB for the S-boxes, some kilobytes more for code, and perhaps under 1 KB for other misc. data and under 1 KB for stack (unless you inadvertently(?) place something large on the stack). 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.