Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2015 20:04:09 +0100 From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com 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. 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.