View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0008288 | Kali Linux | [All Projects] General Bug | public | 2023-05-06 01:43 | 2023-05-10 01:14 |
| Reporter | kimocoder | Assigned To | |||
| Priority | high | Severity | major | Reproducibility | always |
| Status | new | Resolution | open | ||
| Product Version | kali-dev | ||||
| Target Version | Fixed in Version | ||||
| Summary | 0008288: OpenCL issues | ||||
| Description | We now include pocl2 (libpocl2) in standard images, this is a bad solution. Intel for Intel, Nvidia for Nvidia and AMD for AMD. If we run the portable O POCL2 on top if these computing libraries, which we do today, user experience related to computing tools will have an issue with decreased hash rate. We dont want this. We cannot do Intel + POCL2 and so, they will be registrated and system 1 and 2 in computing tools like hashcat. Register as 2, devided. This will decrease computing hashed significant. Intel ICD for Intel, Nvidia ICD for Intel, AMD for AMD and POCL2 for NetHunter or ARM64 systems is what we want. | ||||
|
|
Reproduced running latest weekly builds. |
|
|
I'm not entirely sure what we should do here. According to chick3nman.. From: chick3nman ``` that's... hmm i think its correct sorta but not fully while it does highlight a real issue with POCL and Intel's OpenCL driver conflicting, im not sure i understand the alternative because, as far as i know, there isn't one Intel's runtime is proprietary (AMD doesnt have their own, you use intel's) and POCL is open source when POCL works, it works fairly well and i don't expect significant performance loss but if you were to not ship POCL, i don't know if you could ship Intel's due to the license I'm pretty sure shipping POCL is the only way to ship a decently working runtime ``` |
|
|
Maybe we could demote whatever depends on pocl2, to having it be a Recommends, so that users can remove it, in favor of installing their own Intel implementation? |
|
|
Me too, I've been thinking about this one several times. Possibly ship none in x86_64 builds, but for NetHunter this will be a positive action again. |
|
|
Possibly, I'll let other decide this � |
|
|
This might actually be a moot point; we actually get hashcat from debian, and it's quite likely that is what is pulling it in for you. opencl packages *should* be providing opencl-icd, which would allow them to replace the pocl2 package without things breaking. Regardless, perhaps if you raise the issue there? It also seems a bit odd that hashcat would default to the cpu if the gpu is installed; are you sure that the intel packages are installing correctly? I don't have the hardware here so I can't tell. |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-05-06 01:43 | kimocoder | New Issue | |
| 2023-05-06 01:44 | kimocoder | Note Added: 0017883 | |
| 2023-05-06 09:02 | xpister | Issue cloned: 0008290 | |
| 2023-05-08 16:25 | steev | Note Added: 0017896 | |
| 2023-05-08 16:27 | steev | Note Added: 0017897 | |
| 2023-05-08 16:29 | kimocoder | Note Added: 0017898 | |
| 2023-05-08 16:30 | kimocoder | Note Added: 0017899 | |
| 2023-05-09 03:22 | steev | Summary | OpenCL issues [important] => OpenCL issues |
| 2023-05-09 03:25 | steev | Note Added: 0017901 | |
| 2023-05-09 16:04 | sidhupb13 | Issue cloned: 0008297 | |
| 2023-05-10 01:14 | arnaudr | Relationship added | has duplicate 0008297 |