Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2015 20:04:09 +0100
From: magnum <>
Subject: Re: descrypt speed

On 2015-02-19 07:29, Sayantan Datta wrote:
> If you are interested, you can test the new revision of descrypt-opencl on
> 970, 980 and 290X. There are three kernels and you can select them by
> changing the parameters HARDCODE_SALT and FULL_UNROLL in
> opencl_DES_hst_dev_shared.h. Setting (1,1) gives you the fastest kernel but
> takes very long to compile, however subsequent runs should compile much
> quicker as pre-compiled kernels(saved to the disk from the prior runs) are
> used. Setting (1,0) gives slower speed but faster compilation time. Setting
> (0,0) is the slowest but compilation is quickest. Also do not fork on same
> system when HARDCODE_SALT is 1.

I did some testing on a GTX980 using (1,1). Tried it with the good old
Gawker dataset, with 3844 salts. After all kernels were compiled (yeah
that took a while) and running full speed, virtual memory footprint was
38.5 GB(!) but resident size was just 2.19 GB which is pretty sane. I
immediately found a bad bug (segfault after cracking a binary with a
non-unique salt) which is now fixed (df95184a).

I also did some changes to ensure proper Makefile dependencies for
opencl_DES_hst_dev_shared.h, so you can now edit that file and be sure a
simple "make" really rebuilds all files involved.


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.