Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 15:28:56 +0200 From: Agnieszka Bielec <bielecagnieszka8@...il.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: PHC: Argon2 on CPU 2015-08-12 14:58 GMT+02:00 Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>: > Hi Agnieszka, > > On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 01:51:08PM +0200, Agnieszka Bielec wrote: >> 2015-08-06 16:02 GMT+02:00 Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>: >> > On Sun, Aug 02, 2015 at 10:46:00PM +0200, Agnieszka Bielec wrote: >> >> OPT >> >> >> >> none@...e ~/Desktop/rr/run $ ./john --test --format=argon2i >> >> Will run 8 OpenMP threads >> >> Benchmarking: argon2i [AVX]... (8xOMP) >> >> memory per hash : 100.00 kB >> >> using different password for benchmarking >> >> DONE >> >> Speed for cost 1 (t) of 3, cost 2 (m) of 100 >> >> Raw: 24064 c/s real, 3019 c/s virtual >> >> >> >> none@...e ~/Desktop/rr/run $ ./john --test --format=argon2d >> >> Will run 8 OpenMP threads >> >> Benchmarking: argon2d [AVX]... (8xOMP) >> >> memory per hash : 100.00 kB >> >> using different password for benchmarking >> >> DONE >> >> Speed for cost 1 (t) of 3, cost 2 (m) of 100 >> >> Raw: 27008 c/s real, 3418 c/s virtual >> > >> > Nice speeds for presumably SIMD-less code >> >> previously SIMD was 3x faster and this was suspicious for me > > I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say correctly. > > Are you trying to say the 3x difference was suspicious to you, and the > much smaller difference you've since obtained (how?) is not? > > If so, I disagree with you: the small difference is more suspicious, > because these benchmarks are at a small memory size (100 KB), so should > fit in L2 cache, and performance should be dominated by that of the > BLAKE2 code. There's more than sufficient parallelism in Argon2 to > fully exploit SIMD. my understanding is that REF code is easy to understand and simd-opt is optimized also including non-simd optimizations > >> > but please note that both of >> > your benchmarks above (REF and OPT) say AVX. Are they lying? >> >> I changed only >> >> #ifdef __SSE2__ >> ARGON2i_SSE >> #else >> ARGON2i >> #endif >> (out, outlen, in, inlen, salt, saltlen, t_cost, m_cost, lanes, >> memory->aligned); >> >> to >> >> #ifdef __SSE2__ >> ARGON2i >> #else >> ARGON2i >> #endif >> (out, outlen, in, inlen, salt, saltlen, t_cost, m_cost, lanes, >> memory->aligned); >> >> and some indef's / undefs in another files > > I asked you one thing, you answered another. I can't make sense of this. > > Once again: in the benchmarks you posted, all comments say "AVX". Are > they wrong, and in what way? they are wrong, in that way that I didn't modified header of file > > As to you the ARGON2i_SSE to ARGON2i change inside #ifdef __SSE2__ > above, is this your answer to my "how?" question above (on how you > obtained the nearly-SIMD performance of presumably non-SIMD code)? > That's weird if so. > >> >> but I was testing these no-sse versions by modyfiyng my code, don't >> >> know if I can just turn-off simd (?), so I can't be sure of these >> >> results although I know that structure of REF is different than >> >> OPT-SSE one(maybe more) function was called a different number of time >> > >> > I'm sorry, but I find your wording above confusing. So let me try to >> > ask a clarifying question: >> > >> > Are you reviewing the generated assembly code? It's trivial to see if >> > the code is using SIMD or not. >> > >> > And while we're at it: >> > >> > How are you obtaining the assembly code for review? Do you replace >> > gcc's "-c" option with "-S"? Or do you use "objdump -d" on the .o file? >> >> I revieved using objdump and I use only objdump >> files argon2d_sse_plug.o argon2i_sse_plug.o blake2b_plug.o are empty >> argon2d_plug.o argon2i_plug.o blake2b-ref_plug.o doesn't contain simd code >> I hope I checked all necessary files > > OK, this does suggest you've checked a non-SIMD build. Is this the one > you reported as "OPT" above? If so, should you remove the "AVX" comment > from it? you are suggesting me to removing avx and you are asking if I should? > > In general, a common theme in your benchmark postings to john-dev is > comments inconsistent with what's actually benchmarked. I'd appreciate > it if you spend the extra minute each time you make code changes to set > the comments printed by the code to match the actual code. I will remove next time, but is there a way to turn off simd from john compilation or by changing in makefile only one place?
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.