mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Factoring Projects > YAFU

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2022-09-22, 04:36   #23
wombatman
I moo ablest echo power!
 
wombatman's Avatar
 
May 2013

181110 Posts
Default

USE_BMI2=1 did solve the compilation issue, so thank you for that!

I am also encountering the issue when running tune() with the second siqs number:

Code:
starting SIQS on c65: 34053408309992030649212497354061832056920539397279047809781589871
overriding small TF cutoff of 20 to 20

==== sieve params ====
n = 67 digits, 220 bits
factor base: 6384 primes (max prime = 136207)
single large prime cutoff: 10215525 (75 * pmax)
allocating 3 large prime slices of factor base
buckets hold 2048 elements
large prime hashtables have 196608 bytes
using AVX2 enabled 32k sieve core
sieve interval: 4 blocks of size 32768
polynomial A has ~ 8 factors
using multiplier of 47
using Q2(x) polynomials for kN mod 8 = 1
using SPV correction of 20 bits, starting at offset 40
trial factoring cutoff at 75 bits

==== sieving in progress (1 thread):    6448 relations needed ====
====           Press ctrl-c to abort and save state           ====
750 rels found: 646 full + 104 from 5321 partial, (6828.42 rels/sec)
Max specified relations found

sieve time = 0.0000, relation time = 0.0000, poly_time = 0.0000
trial division touched 99728 sieve locations out of 2064384000
1699 rels found: 1276 full + 423 from 10689 partial, (6822.74 rels/sec)

sieving required 7875 total polynomials (124 'A' polynomials)
trial division touched 99728 sieve locations out of 2064384000
total reports = 99728, total surviving reports = 32675
total blocks sieved = 63000, avg surviving reports per block = 0.52
Elapsed time: 1.7537 sec
elapsed time for ~10k relations of c65 = 1.7539 seconds.
extrapolated time for complete factorization = 4.8349 seconds
double free or corruption (!prev)
Aborted
If I do siqs(rsa()) to generate a random similarly sized (or larger) number, it does just fine.
wombatman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-09-22, 06:30   #24
kruoli
 
kruoli's Avatar
 
"Oliver"
Sep 2017
Porta Westfalica, DE

23·5·29 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by James Heinrich View Post
Xeon E5-2687W
It's E5-2587W v4, which is much newer.

Last fiddled with by kruoli on 2022-09-22 at 06:31 Reason: Fixed quotation.
kruoli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-09-22, 13:53   #25
James Heinrich
 
James Heinrich's Avatar
 
"James Heinrich"
May 2004
ex-Northern Ontario

F0716 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kruoli View Post
It's E5-2587W v4, which is much newer.
Oops.
I keep a list of nearly 5000 CPUs for Prime95 benchmark data, and yet I missed that.
James Heinrich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-09-22, 14:05   #26
kruoli
 
kruoli's Avatar
 
"Oliver"
Sep 2017
Porta Westfalica, DE

23·5·29 Posts
Default

One has to admit that this naming scheme was not very evident; the one for Intel Core i is much more understandable (excluding some oddities like recent mobile CPUs etc.).
kruoli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-09-22, 14:45   #27
bsquared
 
bsquared's Avatar
 
"Ben"
Feb 2007

71328 Posts
Default

Problem in tune() fixed.
Also fixed an issue in microecm when compiling with gcc (verified it works now with gcc-11.1.0).
Re-built and re-uploaded the windows executables.
bsquared is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-09-22, 16:08   #28
James Heinrich
 
James Heinrich's Avatar
 
"James Heinrich"
May 2004
ex-Northern Ontario

384710 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bsquared View Post
Problem in tune() fixed.
New build of regular version completed tune fine on my i3-8100, and it's still running on my i7-3930K.

I do notice that the 3930K is embarrassingly slow in some cases, perhaps there's a fallback codepath due to lack of hardware features.
For example, SIQS on c90 42735....7841 ran at 1135 rel/s on my i3, and is currently running at 3.26 on my 3930K. That's 350x slower, is that sane and/or expected?
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	c90.png
Views:	8
Size:	9.5 KB
ID:	27348  

Last fiddled with by James Heinrich on 2022-09-22 at 16:11
James Heinrich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-09-22, 16:28   #29
bsquared
 
bsquared's Avatar
 
"Ben"
Feb 2007

E5A16 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by James Heinrich View Post
New build of regular version completed tune fine on my i3-8100, and it's still running on my i7-3930K.

I do notice that the 3930K is embarrassingly slow in some cases, perhaps there's a fallback codepath due to lack of hardware features.
For example, SIQS on c90 42735....7841 ran at 1135 rel/s on my i3, and is currently running at 3.26 on my 3930K. That's 350x slower, is that sane and/or expected?
No, that's not right. Thanks, I'll take a look.
bsquared is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-09-22, 20:33   #30
wombatman
I moo ablest echo power!
 
wombatman's Avatar
 
May 2013

111000100112 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bsquared View Post
Problem in tune() fixed.
Also fixed an issue in microecm when compiling with gcc (verified it works now with gcc-11.1.0).
Re-built and re-uploaded the windows executables.
Just pulled the latest and can confirm tune() works flawlessly now. Thanks!
wombatman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-09-23, 14:58   #31
kotenok2000
 
Mar 2018

2·52 Posts
Default

When i run
yafu.exe "factor(3105695207255595953041248693082694537249993263358883561705428359401428617)" -p -threads 8
with use_gpuecm yafu runs siqs with one thread.

Last fiddled with by kotenok2000 on 2022-09-23 at 15:21
kotenok2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-09-23, 15:32   #32
kotenok2000
 
Mar 2018

5010 Posts
Default

GNFS also runs with one thread. Even with lathreads=8
kotenok2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-09-23, 15:58   #33
storm5510
Random Account
 
storm5510's Avatar
 
Aug 2009
Not U. + S.A.

44358 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kotenok2000 View Post
When i run
yafu.exe "factor(3105695207255595953041248693082694537249993263358883561705428359401428617)" -p -threads 8
with use_gpuecm yafu runs siqs with one thread.
It wants to see the thread value in yafu.ini. I have mine set to 6 and it uses all 6. If you have not ran "tune" then you should.

As far as I know, YAFU has no GPU capability.
storm5510 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
yafu ignoring yafu.ini chris2be8 YAFU 9 2022-02-17 17:52
YAFU Version Differences nivek000 YAFU 2 2021-12-21 16:21
How I install YAFU version 2 onto my Ubuntu Machines EdH EdH 4 2021-09-26 22:39
Running YAFU via Aliqueit doesn't find yafu.ini EdH YAFU 8 2018-03-14 17:22
YAFU version 1.31 bsquared YAFU 26 2012-04-23 03:16

All times are UTC. The time now is 11:24.


Mon Oct 3 11:24:24 UTC 2022 up 46 days, 8:52, 0 users, load averages: 0.65, 0.93, 1.02

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.

≠ ± ∓ ÷ × · − √ ‰ ⊗ ⊕ ⊖ ⊘ ⊙ ≤ ≥ ≦ ≧ ≨ ≩ ≺ ≻ ≼ ≽ ⊏ ⊐ ⊑ ⊒ ² ³ °
∠ ∟ ° ≅ ~ ‖ ⟂ ⫛
≡ ≜ ≈ ∝ ∞ ≪ ≫ ⌊⌋ ⌈⌉ ∘ ∏ ∐ ∑ ∧ ∨ ∩ ∪ ⨀ ⊕ ⊗ 𝖕 𝖖 𝖗 ⊲ ⊳
∅ ∖ ∁ ↦ ↣ ∩ ∪ ⊆ ⊂ ⊄ ⊊ ⊇ ⊃ ⊅ ⊋ ⊖ ∈ ∉ ∋ ∌ ℕ ℤ ℚ ℝ ℂ ℵ ℶ ℷ ℸ 𝓟
¬ ∨ ∧ ⊕ → ← ⇒ ⇐ ⇔ ∀ ∃ ∄ ∴ ∵ ⊤ ⊥ ⊢ ⊨ ⫤ ⊣ … ⋯ ⋮ ⋰ ⋱
∫ ∬ ∭ ∮ ∯ ∰ ∇ ∆ δ ∂ ℱ ℒ ℓ
𝛢𝛼 𝛣𝛽 𝛤𝛾 𝛥𝛿 𝛦𝜀𝜖 𝛧𝜁 𝛨𝜂 𝛩𝜃𝜗 𝛪𝜄 𝛫𝜅 𝛬𝜆 𝛭𝜇 𝛮𝜈 𝛯𝜉 𝛰𝜊 𝛱𝜋 𝛲𝜌 𝛴𝜎𝜍 𝛵𝜏 𝛶𝜐 𝛷𝜙𝜑 𝛸𝜒 𝛹𝜓 𝛺𝜔