Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 18:14:35 +0300 From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: [GSoC] building JtR for MIC On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 09:35:48PM +0800, Lei Zhang wrote: > OK, I'll try to find out the cause of OpenSSL's abnormality on MIC. Thanks! > BTW, I found that MIC has another codename 'k1om', which is actually supported by config.sub. I updated the configuration options for GMP and LibreSSL to use k1om as the target, so that there's no need to modify the original config.sub (see the pull request <https://github.com/magnumripper/JohnTheRipper/pull/1148>). I'm thinking about also transferring from 'mic' to 'k1om' in john-jumbo, to make it more consistent with the autoconf system. > > What's your opinion? I had the same thought a couple of weeks ago, but did not find that k1om is supported by autoconf. I now see it is in config.sub, as you say. I should have searched the files rather than relied on a Google web search for "k1om" along with "autoconf", as I did. I did find k1om supported in GNU binutils, and curiously it also supports the older l1om presumably for Larrabee. It looks like Intel later settled on MIC as the official name, using it not only in icc -mmic flag but also in directory names, but maybe GNU tools in fact choose to stay with the already-introduced k1om name (presumably for Knights Corner). "uname -m" does indeed report k1om, as the Linux kernel for MIC is built with GNU tools. So, yes, given your finding it makes sense for us to transfer to k1om in jumbo. I'm not sure if I should rename mic.h and the linux-mic make target in the core tree as well. What do you think? For an end user, this may be a bit confusing. I think Intel does not use the k1om name. 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.