Topic: Bounty for Cracking Bitmain S9 BMminer - page 4. (Read 38689 times)

ATM I was running a 24hour race between two S9.

One with modified driver settings and one with default.

modified driver (pari with git atm)
S9-1: (15.14 Th/s Scoring Hash Rate)    (21.47 Th/s 5 minutes)  (16.11 Th/sHour)  (9.205 Th/sDay  = started this morning)

unmodified driver
S9-2: (6.320 Th/s Scoring Hash Rate)    (7.158 Th/s 5 minutes (8.948 Th/sHour)  (12.62 Th/s Day  = diff changed 3pm)

Check! It really does nothing other, just the Version number is changed and the copyright notice.

https://github.com/troydhanson/uthash/blame/master/src/uthash.h


p.s. thx to all donators (btc/paypal) 

You want feedback? Sure. Updating uthash does precisely nothing.

Dear Community,

I need more time to read all the posts.

But I want to inform you, that I published an update. Also the binaries are updated.

p.s. uthash.h - UTHASH_VERSION 2.0.1 - Give me a feedback please if it was not a good idead, but the Cgminer is working also perfect with it.



at the git folder I was using this after every new build:


https://github.com/Zwilla/bmminer-cgminer492


_{now reading the post above}

   Yes which is why I decided to not do  escrow services.  The older  project is still in  active violation status. That would not be the same as: forgive and forget since it is active.
 It is what I failed to understand about the issue.  I did not realize it was active.  Like I mention understanding code and code GPL rules is not my area of expertise. Once informed the prior problem was current and active I stopped my escrow service and refunded all involved.

Wel said 

You weren't doing anything wrong. I had zero intention of getting involved and making a judgement call on fubly's work. However, you asked me to sign off on it which is when I spoke up about my concerns. I still think if you're happy with the product he generates then it makes no difference what I think, but if you want me to bless it, I cannot do that for the reasons I've outlined. Getting Kano to sign off on his work is likely 100x harder. The language barrier is not helping the discussion either, where fubly is asking  fellow German to explain why he might be accused of dishonouring the license requirements of the GPL when Kano's concern there is fubly's previous project, and Kano would refuse to "forgive and forget" unless fubly goes back and releases all the hidden code and retracts claims of improved performance.

Here is my $ 50 donation to the other party.

i.e. kano & ck

so $100 was donated ½ to team kano/CK  ½ to FUBLY

I will not use the software on my s-9's

but I would like to ask kano and or ck  to pm me in the future  if there is a problem with something I am doing on the site.  I in turn will do the same with them.

Query: Looking at https://github.com/Zwilla/bmminer-cgminer492/blob/master/build.md I take it we have to SSH into a miner and do the instructions on the command line.

Once 1 of the .tar files is made for a miner, can that be copied/backed up to a PC and then used with Bitmains GUI page to directly flash our other miners as an update??

From a Dr. of CompSci in my Skype room (yes the once infamous AMT room is still alive!) regarding GPL violations and sale of programs:
  1) Yes Fubly should have released his driver code work for the s7.

  2) Since most of the s9 code he is doing is based on s7 work (even Kano said that) AND SINCE THIS s9 CODE IS PUBLISHED, then point-1 is now moot.

  3) As to sale of what should be considered code for an add-on: Even with CGminer being open-source one CAN sell modified packages containing it and closed source code. Just fulfill the requirements of pointing to/providing the source(s) for the Open Source parts.

  4) Point-3 applies ONLY if code such as ASICboost is not put into CGminer as part of it but rather is a helper add-on. Something  that intercepts header information/manipulates it and then passes the block information to CGminer. In other words, only if the boost is pretty much stand-alone code and that is what is being bought.

  5) The only formatting fault that stands out in Fubly's git is that the 1st commit should have been a clean copy of 4.9.2 with all the other code commits after that to provide a clear deviation reference point for Fubly's code changes.

I was very excited about the intention of this bounty and fully supported it - the upside was massive for all of us if not the entire ASICS mining world, because it will teach Bitmain a lesson that the mining community can make a difference.

I guess I am wrong... IMHO, Bitmain wins again...

After reading the few pages of feedback...

I am disappointed that parties involved have not reached a conclusion, in-fact I see many new information now and have made my own analysis and made my recommendations to my investors.

I am not happy about the outcomes and rationales on why this project is not approved, but that's sorely my own opinion and selfish analysis.

Therefore, I have made a decision to stay out of this matter, as I am firstly responsible for maximizing my investors returns in BTC and non-BTC mining and trading.

There is only so much I can do and control, the things that is beyond my control ... I do not want to spend any more time and effort on it.

Like other members, I will send my original BTC donation to Fubly as he has done the work for the intended bounty. The usability of the fubly's final published codes in my preferred pool is a different matter altogether.

To all parties involved, kano, -ck, fubly.... I don't have any grudges against anyone of you - all of you have your own opinions, principles and reputation to protect --- just be nice to each other.

Live long and prosper!

MinerLink - That's it! http://www.minerlink.com/
Looks like all s7's from batch 1 on up to my last (batch-18) has setup for it as part of the Bitmain GUI under Miner Configuration as a 3rd choice next to Advanced

I think it has to do with this program also:

https://github.com/bitmaintech/minerlink_agent

• Receive commands from server and response miner state.

I wonder if that has to do with Bitmain's "Control your miner via the Cloud" service that they used to link to on their site. Just looked and do not see it anymore offhand. The s9 does not have a GUI setting for it, I'll check some s7's at work manyana.

Think the S5 and s7 even have something in the GUI about setting access to that service.
AFAIK Bitmain never activated it. While definitely think it would be BAD idea to give Bitmain or subsidiary that access, I still tried a few times in the past to see what it was about.

Are you wondering if I told you that bitmain can control every miner?

If you want also to block them, just use the new version which is published right now.

https://github.com/Zwilla/bmminer-cgminer492/blob/master/build.md

I unset the function now.

If you wand deeper details take a look to the driver now!

https://github.com/Zwilla/bmminer-cgminer492/blob/master/driver-btm-c5.c
and
https://github.com/Zwilla/bmminer-cgminer492/blob/master/driver-btm-c5.h

P.s.
https://github.com/Zwilla/bmminer-cgminer492
Try the software, and share your results here.

---

This here has nothing more to do with the bounty!!!! This is all after the BREAK!

Next Steps on cgminer new options.
Read this only if you also believe that a chip timeout effects better work.

I will implement now an external field for the timeout.

--timeoutC5

For that we can set this option (default: if unset = bitmain antminer S9 default).

You all know this:

oooooooo oooooooo xooooooo xooooooo oooooxoo oooxoooo oooooooo ooooooo

I will explain it:

o = good chip
x = bad chip

But what declares a GOOD and a BAD?

This:

Question here: avg_num

The function: check_system_work, sets the avg_num value to zero at start, and then an

if (diff.tv_sec > 60) also to zero and then

inside a for

avg_num += dev->chain_asic_nonce[j];


I'm not finished with this post. I working on atm

So ... the above, ignoring the first comment about bmminer, ... is 2 statements:

1) An excuse why there is no complete source for the previous version
2) A stupid false statement about how his previous version was faster

Umm ... I only came back and posted again coz certain people were making false statements about me ... I'm out of here (again) coz it's a waste of time reading and posting here.