Pages:
Author

Topic: CCminer palgin's mod (alexis78 fork) - page 2. (Read 10240 times)

legendary
Activity: 1797
Merit: 1028
May 09, 2017, 02:20:44 PM
#32
In case anyone is interested, i've added support on suprnova (currently ZEC & KMD) for this miner variant as well...

Is it still available for download ?

THE BINARIES HAVE BEEN REMOVED--

Palgin may revisit the project later.  He stated from the start that it was a test project.       --scryptr
legendary
Activity: 2688
Merit: 1240
May 09, 2017, 11:22:05 AM
#31
In case anyone is interested, i've added support on suprnova (currently ZEC & KMD) for this miner variant as well...

Is it still available for download ?
sp_
legendary
Activity: 2954
Merit: 1087
Team Black developer
May 09, 2017, 08:31:14 AM
#30
I think you easily know which changes I did, no need to pretend something...

Did you implement the todo: in the code?
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 520
May 09, 2017, 08:21:24 AM
#29
I don't mind you work on my work, in fact, I encourage it. Sadly, nobody picked up yet. But what I don't like is people breaking the license we put in with a purpose. You can mod as much as you like, but you have to disclose the source.

Why don't you opensource the latest changes in excavegator. The opensource nheqminer is 10% slower..

I think you easily know which changes I did, no need to pretend something...
legendary
Activity: 2716
Merit: 1094
Black Belt Developer
May 09, 2017, 08:19:19 AM
#28
Otherwise, people would just sell open work with little or no modifications.

Nobody want's to buy if the speed isn't improved.

When you optimize you often you need to try 10 different approaches to gain speed, so a few lines of code can take 100hours to make. because the 9 first attempts didn't work.

It wasn't directed to you: you know how much you worked on the code, I don't need to teach you anything.
Still, the license is the license.
sp_
legendary
Activity: 2954
Merit: 1087
Team Black developer
May 09, 2017, 08:08:28 AM
#27
Otherwise, people would just sell open work with little or no modifications.

Nobody want's to buy if the speed isn't improved.

When you optimize you often you need to try 10 different approaches to gain speed, so a few lines of code can take 100hours to make. because the 9 first attempts didn't work.

legendary
Activity: 2716
Merit: 1094
Black Belt Developer
May 09, 2017, 05:58:35 AM
#26
This is key gap in GPL. Instead of being a single standard (like BSD-Sockets or POSIX), most programmers are forced to write a new solution from scratch every time. Year after year. Because a lot of opensource stuff can be only "GPL opensource stuff". Religion fanatic wars for "freedom", where not freedom. Not public domain license.

I ask once again to think each programmer over licensing wars and stop writing the GPL. And start write Public Domain stuff for each human. Otherwise, we will continue to write shit code for decades (Just for fan!) without achieving a good result, while having hundreds of weak solutions.

I don't see what's wrong with "I publish my work with sources for free and want others, who build upon it, do the same".
Otherwise, people would just sell open work with little or no modifications.
If everybody publishes the sources, there is no violation and everybody is free to do what they want.
OZR
sr. member
Activity: 281
Merit: 250
You're in my wonderland!
May 09, 2017, 05:49:31 AM
#25
This is key gap in GPL. Instead of being a single standard (like BSD-Sockets or POSIX), most programmers are forced to write a new solution from scratch every time. Year after year. Because a lot of opensource stuff can be only "GPL opensource stuff". Religion fanatic wars for "freedom", where not freedom. Not public domain license.

I ask once again to think each programmer over licensing wars and stop writing the GPL. And start write Public Domain stuff for each human. Otherwise, we will continue to write shit code for decades (Just for fun!) without achieving a good result, while having hundreds of weak solutions.
sr. member
Activity: 266
Merit: 250
May 09, 2017, 05:28:59 AM
#24
timetravel-algo seems to be broken
got "booo" (low difficulty share) with palgin`s mod ccminer only  Sad

Did you choose -a option correctly? In my mod -a timetravel is original one and -a timetravel10 is for BitCore...
sp_
legendary
Activity: 2954
Merit: 1087
Team Black developer
May 09, 2017, 04:41:56 AM
#23
I don't mind you work on my work, in fact, I encourage it. Sadly, nobody picked up yet. But what I don't like is people breaking the license we put in with a purpose. You can mod as much as you like, but you have to disclose the source.

Why don't you opensource the latest changes in excavegator. The opensource nheqminer is 10% slower..
legendary
Activity: 2026
Merit: 1005
May 09, 2017, 04:33:39 AM
#22
timetravel-algo seems to be broken
got "booo" (low difficulty share) with palgin`s mod ccminer only  Sad
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 520
May 09, 2017, 04:33:18 AM
#21
What you most likely did to achieve high speed is to make buckets smaller. This can of course greatly speed up everything, and displayed iterations are high, but on pool, you will get slow speed. These buckets sizes are there for a reason and not something you can simply shed off and benefit.

I also don't understand why would you have pool issues; equihash protocol is standardized, every pool works if it follows official zcash stratum specifications.

Also, we have released the source under GPL v3 and you are obligated to disclose full source when distributing the bins...

Yes, you're right, that's exactly what I've done and found that won't work the right way, I'm still learning and practicing my skills, sorry for practicing on your work, which is highly appreciated by me. I've already removed the bins, think it's time to try to write my own kernels from the scratch, SKL and MKL versions.

I don't mind you work on my work, in fact, I encourage it. Sadly, nobody picked up yet. But what I don't like is people breaking the license we put in with a purpose. You can mod as much as you like, but you have to disclose the source.
sr. member
Activity: 266
Merit: 250
May 09, 2017, 02:24:50 AM
#20
What you most likely did to achieve high speed is to make buckets smaller. This can of course greatly speed up everything, and displayed iterations are high, but on pool, you will get slow speed. These buckets sizes are there for a reason and not something you can simply shed off and benefit.

I also don't understand why would you have pool issues; equihash protocol is standardized, every pool works if it follows official zcash stratum specifications.

Also, we have released the source under GPL v3 and you are obligated to disclose full source when distributing the bins...

Yes, you're right, that's exactly what I've done and found that won't work the right way, I'm still learning and practicing my skills, sorry for practicing on your work, which is highly appreciated by me. I've already removed the bins, think it's time to try to write my own kernels from the scratch, SKL and MKL versions.
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 520
May 08, 2017, 03:53:31 PM
#19
What you most likely did to achieve high speed is to make buckets smaller. This can of course greatly speed up everything, and displayed iterations are high, but on pool, you will get slow speed. These buckets sizes are there for a reason and not something you can simply shed off and benefit.

I also don't understand why would you have pool issues; equihash protocol is standardized, every pool works if it follows official zcash stratum specifications.

Also, we have released the source under GPL v3 and you are obligated to disclose full source when distributing the bins...
sr. member
Activity: 266
Merit: 250
May 08, 2017, 01:05:22 PM
#18
The results doesn't seem to validate on the pool.

When I run 4 instances I get high numbers on all the windows, but on the pool low numbers..
Low difficulty seem to make the miner more stable.

launch batfile:

:loop
ccminer -a equihash -o stratum+tcp://equihash.mine.zpool.ca:2142 -u 1CTiNJyoUmbdMRACtteRWXhGqtSETYd6Vd -i 20 -p d=32
goto loop


Thanks, I found the reason in unsafe shared mem operations I used in kernel, working on a solution, but it will take long to make it safe without huge affect on speed.
sp_
legendary
Activity: 2954
Merit: 1087
Team Black developer
May 08, 2017, 12:46:08 PM
#17
The results doesn't seem to validate on the pool.

When I run 4 instances I get high numbers on all the windows, but on the pool low numbers..
Low difficulty seem to make the miner more stable.

launch batfile:

:loop
ccminer -a equihash -o stratum+tcp://equihash.mine.zpool.ca:2142 -u 1CTiNJyoUmbdMRACtteRWXhGqtSETYd6Vd -i 20 -p d=32
goto loop
sp_
legendary
Activity: 2954
Merit: 1087
Team Black developer
May 08, 2017, 12:18:29 PM
#16
[2017-05-08 19:17:38] accepted: 19/19 (diff 6.005), 258.94 H/s yes!
[2017-05-08 19:17:39] GPU #0: solver: CUDA error 'an illegal memory access was encountered' in func 'eq_cuda_context::so
lve' line 2054
[2017-05-08 19:17:41] GPU #0: an illegal memory access was encountered
[2017-05-08 19:17:41] GPU #0: scanhash_equihash:188 all CUDA-capable devices are busy or unavailable
[2017-05-08 19:17:41] GPU #0: init: CUDA: failed to alloc memory
sr. member
Activity: 266
Merit: 250
May 08, 2017, 12:04:10 PM
#15
are you planning to boost some algo?,sweepstakecoin this new coin has the old JHA algo, which could see a boost i think

Maybe in future, currently I'm sitting counting days to my vacation trip and don't have enough work to do, so I decided to practice my skills and try adding something to crypto community, also I'm a miner myself (not so huge as SP, only 20x5 Nvidia cards farms).
legendary
Activity: 3248
Merit: 1070
May 08, 2017, 11:54:45 AM
#14
are you planning to boost some algo?,sweepstakecoin this new coin has the old JHA algo, which could see a boost i think
sr. member
Activity: 266
Merit: 250
May 08, 2017, 11:40:25 AM
#13

ubuntu 16.04 build error

make[2]: *** No rule to make target 'x11/bitcore.cu', needed by 'x11/bitcore.o'.  Stop.
make[2]: Leaving directory '/home/home2/btx'
Makefile:2113: recipe for target 'all-recursive' failed
make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/home2/btx'
Makefile:631: recipe for target 'all' failed
make: *** [all] Error 2


Ooops, haven't mention that I'm new to github and can forget something here and there, change bitcore.cu to timetravel10.cu in makefile.am and this should be fine. Anyway, I'm working only on "windows" branch right now, can't guarantee you'll  be able to build this under Linux systems.
Pages:
Jump to: