phc-discussions - Re: [PHC] OMG we have benchmarks

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2015 07:55:10 +0200
From: Milan Broz <gmazyland@...il.com>
To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net
Subject: Re: [PHC] OMG we have benchmarks

Hi Bill,

On 04/02/2015 06:35 AM, Bill Cox wrote:
> These charts look like Lyra2 is still running with 2 threads, and
> Yescrypt is still running with 6 rounds rather than a more comparable
> 2 rounds.

The code for #if (nPARALLEL > 1) for Lyra2 is not compiled in.
This is the patch
https://github.com/mbroz/PHCtest/commit/2e0d07b4a3f7d2dd69a1729c6770c0e39938fdc4

For yescrypt - I did not want to modify code (except for clear segfaults
which prevents test run).

> These are pretty pictures, but the benchmarks I ran with a bit more
> care showed a very different picture.  I'd hate to see a winner
> selected based on nice coloring and one algorithm running 2 threads
> vs all the rest with 1, and one algorithms running 6 rounds rather
> than 2.

I can convert it to black&white if it helps ;-)

Seriously, I do not want to tweak algorithms myself.
I can add another version but point me to git where is the modification
when author did these changes. But yescrypt was submitted in some form
and I think it should be tested this way.

I added Steve's test because it was a nice idea, if there is a problem,
let's fix it or if it is unfixable (without code modification) abandon
the test completely.

For Lyra2 it was clear bug with compile parameters but I think it is fixed.
If there is another mistake, please let me know.

Thanks,
Milan