Pages:
Author

Topic: [CLOSED] Bitmine CoinCraft A1 28nm chip distribution / DIY support - page 10. (Read 81190 times)

donator
Activity: 919
Merit: 1000
Having some trouble with getting 0x04 responce on the 0x04 reset command.
I'm doing the HW reset as described. The signals from raspi passed through level shifters.
Chip select DI CLK are ok. I see 0x04 passing into the chip but there is nothing at the output.
The VDDcore is 0.7 volts. Maybe it is too low?

That's pretty likely too low. I had similar issues when I was running the chip that low. 0.8V seems to be pretty reliable for at least basic comms for most chips. A couple wouldn't hash at that voltage but once I brought it up to about 0.84V they were fine.

Of course, now those chips run hotter than the others Smiley

This. The sample chips need 850mV min, not sure if the chips from the production batch are better suitable for down-volting - but obviously everybody is looking to up-volt them anyway Smiley


Before going faster I need to get some cooling in there though. I noticed on your bring up page you mention keeping the temps below 50C. Is this a hard limit?

I was just doing a longer test where I kept all four chips completely busy with your test vector and verified that the correct nonces came out. Running at 240Mhz a couple of the chips did get a little hot. The two running at 0.8V stayed well below 50C but the two at 0.84V got up to about 61C.

No errors during the 12 minutes I ran the test. Theoretical hash rate is 32 * 240Mhz = 7.68GH/s and actual turned out to be 7.62GH/s.

But, how bad is it to run the chips that hot? Is that a might get bad results now and then or a might damage chips?

No, it is not a hard limit but given to us by chip manufacturer during bring-up to exclude temperature as root-cause for troubles. And the 50°C were for heat-sink, so there should be some margin left.

If you reach the hot area, you'll notice invalid results first. What I noticed is a fail-safe behaviour (not sure if intended): if chip gets way too hot, it eventually will reset itself and stop working. With that, you corrupt the chain (that chip won't respond until after next HW-reset and re-enumeration), but it survives potential burnouts.

Wish I had such a burnout protection built-in Smiley



I have just tested with 0.84V. Still no responce.
zefir mentioned earlier that at the startup chip is configured at 12MHz reference clock. And the SPI speed must not be > system clock. I wounder what is the PLL multiplier at the startup to calculate the system clock.
Or maybe it doesn't matter what SPI speed to use for initialization? I guess what i wrote above is applied to SPI speed between the chips not between uC and 1st chip.
Currently when i run cgminer i see 500khz SPI speed. Is that sufficient?

The reset value for PLL multiplier is 800/12, i.e. with 12MHz ref clock chip is clocked at nominal 800MHz. As long as you do not hash, you do not need to modify the PLL register at all, even without proper cooling. The default SPI divider is 64, so you should measure 12.5MHz inter-SPI clock. Your host clock needs to be below that, which with 500kHz it is.

If you still don't get any feedback from the chip, please double check that the RSTn is kept at 1V8 for at least 1s before your first command to the chip.

Oh, and maybe to state the obvious: if you have a chip chain and you write a broadcast command, you need to send zeros to push the command to the last chip and back. See how the polling in the reference driver ensures to write enough data to get the commands through the chain.

sr. member
Activity: 335
Merit: 250
Having some trouble with getting 0x04 responce on the 0x04 reset command.
I'm doing the HW reset as described. The signals from raspi passed through level shifters.
Chip select DI CLK are ok. I see 0x04 passing into the chip but there is nothing at the output.
The VDDcore is 0.7 volts. Maybe it is too low?

That's pretty likely too low. I had similar issues when I was running the chip that low. 0.8V seems to be pretty reliable for at least basic comms for most chips. A couple wouldn't hash at that voltage but once I brought it up to about 0.84V they were fine.

Of course, now those chips run hotter than the others Smiley

I have just tested with 0.84V. Still no responce.
zefir mentioned earlier that at the startup chip is configured at 12MHz reference clock. And the SPI speed must not be > system clock. I wounder what is the PLL multiplier at the startup to calculate the system clock.
Or maybe it doesn't matter what SPI speed to use for initialization? I guess what i wrote above is applied to SPI speed between the chips not between uC and 1st chip.
Currently when i run cgminer i see 500khz SPI speed. Is that sufficient?
newbie
Activity: 26
Merit: 0

Thanks for feedback and good luck (you're almost there Wink)

Yeah, now I just gotta get it to go fast Smiley Well, and get it working with cgminer. Since I'm driving the parts with a micro controller I need to write a new cgminer driver to drive that…

Before going faster I need to get some cooling in there though. I noticed on your bring up page you mention keeping the temps below 50C. Is this a hard limit?

I was just doing a longer test where I kept all four chips completely busy with your test vector and verified that the correct nonces came out. Running at 240Mhz a couple of the chips did get a little hot. The two running at 0.8V stayed well below 50C but the two at 0.84V got up to about 61C.

No errors during the 12 minutes I ran the test. Theoretical hash rate is 32 * 240Mhz = 7.68GH/s and actual turned out to be 7.62GH/s.

But, how bad is it to run the chips that hot? Is that a might get bad results now and then or a might damage chips?

Thanks!
newbie
Activity: 26
Merit: 0
Having some trouble with getting 0x04 responce on the 0x04 reset command.
I'm doing the HW reset as described. The signals from raspi passed through level shifters.
Chip select DI CLK are ok. I see 0x04 passing into the chip but there is nothing at the output.
The VDDcore is 0.7 volts. Maybe it is too low?

That's pretty likely too low. I had similar issues when I was running the chip that low. 0.8V seems to be pretty reliable for at least basic comms for most chips. A couple wouldn't hash at that voltage but once I brought it up to about 0.84V they were fine.

Of course, now those chips run hotter than the others Smiley
sr. member
Activity: 335
Merit: 250
Having some trouble with getting 0x04 responce on the 0x04 reset command.
I'm doing the HW reset as described. The signals from raspi passed through level shifters.
Chip select DI CLK are ok. I see 0x04 passing into the chip but there is nothing at the output.
The VDDcore is 0.7 volts. Maybe it is too low?
donator
Activity: 919
Merit: 1000
Interestingly, I get six nonces? The four you post, the one I assume that was overwritten and an extra. Same results for all four chips (haven't tried the second board).

That's ok. The reference job was taken from a nightly session where I collected the share log of a BE blade miner and picked up a work item with a high number of winning nonces. It does not necessarily mean the blade found all of them, so if you happen to verify the 6th result as valid, I will add to the related post.

Thanks for feedback and good luck (you're almost there Wink)
newbie
Activity: 26
Merit: 0

You will notice that you get back 4 results, although the job has 5 winning nonces. That is because the A1 has an output queue of 4 elements, so one of the results is overwritten. To get them all, you need to pull the results early enough while chip is still hashing. Have a look at the reference driver to check how to do this continuously.


Thank you! I had indeed switched over to cgminer but getting the test to run correctly makes me feel a lot better about the status of my hardware. Smiley

Interestingly, I get six nonces? The four you post, the one I assume that was overwritten and an extra. Same results for all four chips (haven't tried the second board).

Code:
************** Got nonce! 18 8d b1 99
************** Got nonce! 3a a6 b2 0c
************** Got nonce! 3f 8f 64 de
************** Got nonce! b9 9c c7 09
************** Got nonce! be 7b 58 b3
************** Got nonce! ec c1 4e 74


What you get back from the chip is a valid Diff1 share, while your pool is obviously asking for higher difficulty shares. That's absolutely normal, i.e. you will see this trace log with every HW that produces Diff1 shares. cgminer then drops all those below pool's difficulty.


OK, perfect. I figured the target difficulty wasn't right given it's fixed in the job creation function. I will integrate your new code at some point. Until then, you're correct: getting confirmation of things working is very helpful!

First, however, it's time to do some reliability testing with the test vector Smiley
donator
Activity: 919
Merit: 1000
Update: bring-up-howto fixes, real target processing


Fix in reference test-vector
totalslacker, burnin and all who tried to test the chip with the test vector I gave some pages ago: I had a copy-paste error there with the first byte (8c instead of 8d). Can't explain how that happened, but fixed it in that post. Really sorry about that, I hope you did not lost to much time with that but instead tried to feed the chip from cgminer directly.

So for reference, this is the exact SPI trace for the job processed by the A1:
Code:
spi mode: 1
bits per word: 8
max speed: 800 kHz
--
TX: 58 bytes:17 01 8D 1F A3 18 D8 0A 25 2C E4 B7 CD 6D 12 2F 80 8F 17 DC D8 10 04 17 EA 3F E8 F3 71 41 70 F3
4B 49 D6 98 8E 01 27 1F 66 52 B6 0A 10 19 00 00 00 00 FF FF 00 1D FF FF FF FF
RX: 58 bytes:00 00 17 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
Processing command 0x0a01
TX: 2 bytes:0A 01
RX: 2 bytes:00 00
TX: 2 bytes:00 00
RX: 2 bytes:1A 01
Cmd 0x1a ACK'd
TX: 6 bytes:00 00 00 00 00 00
RX: 6 bytes:46 C8 21 85 01 20
Processing command 0x0a01
TX: 2 bytes:0A 01
RX: 2 bytes:00 00
TX: 2 bytes:00 00
RX: 2 bytes:1A 01
Cmd 0x1a ACK'd
TX: 6 bytes:00 00 00 00 00 00
RX: 6 bytes:46 C8 21 84 01 20
Processing command 0x0800
TX: 2 bytes:08 00
RX: 2 bytes:00 00
TX: 2 bytes:00 00
RX: 2 bytes:18 01
Got nonce for job_id 1
TX: 4 bytes:00 00 00 00
RX: 4 bytes:18 8D B1 99
Nonce: 4 bytes:18 8D B1 99
Golden**************************: 4 bytes:18 8D B1 99
Processing command 0x0800
TX: 2 bytes:08 00
RX: 2 bytes:00 00
TX: 2 bytes:00 00
RX: 2 bytes:18 01
Got nonce for job_id 1
TX: 4 bytes:00 00 00 00
RX: 4 bytes:3F 8F 64 DE
Nonce: 4 bytes:3F 8F 64 DE
Golden**************************: 4 bytes:3F 8F 64 DE
Processing command 0x0800
TX: 2 bytes:08 00
RX: 2 bytes:00 00
TX: 2 bytes:00 00
RX: 2 bytes:18 01
Got nonce for job_id 1
TX: 4 bytes:00 00 00 00
RX: 4 bytes:B9 9C C7 09
Nonce: 4 bytes:B9 9C C7 09
Golden**************************: 4 bytes:B9 9C C7 09
Processing command 0x0800
TX: 2 bytes:08 00
RX: 2 bytes:00 00
TX: 2 bytes:00 00
RX: 2 bytes:18 01
Got nonce for job_id 1
TX: 4 bytes:00 00 00 00
RX: 4 bytes:EC C1 4E 74
Nonce: 4 bytes:EC C1 4E 74
Golden**************************: 4 bytes:EC C1 4E 74
Processing command 0x0800
TX: 2 bytes:08 00
RX: 2 bytes:00 00
TX: 2 bytes:00 00
RX: 2 bytes:00 00
TX: 2 bytes:00 00
RX: 2 bytes:00 00
TX: 2 bytes:00 00
RX: 2 bytes:00 00
TX: 2 bytes:00 00
RX: 2 bytes:00 00
TX: 2 bytes:00 00
RX: 2 bytes:00 00
TX: 2 bytes:00 00
RX: 2 bytes:00 00
TX: 2 bytes:00 00
RX: 2 bytes:00 00
TX: 2 bytes:00 00
RX: 2 bytes:00 00
TX: 2 bytes:00 00
RX: 2 bytes:00 00
TX: 2 bytes:00 00
RX: 2 bytes:00 00
TX: 2 bytes:00 00
RX: 2 bytes:00 00
TX: 2 bytes:00 00
RX: 2 bytes:00 00
TX: 2 bytes:00 00
RX: 2 bytes:00 00
TX: 2 bytes:00 00
RX: 2 bytes:00 00
TX: 2 bytes:00 00
RX: 2 bytes:00 00
TX: 2 bytes:00 00
RX: 2 bytes:08 00
Output queue empty

What is happening here is:
1) feed the A1 with the given job
2) loop over register read until chip is jobless
3) read out found results

You will notice that you get back 4 results, although the job has 5 winning nonces. That is because the A1 has an output queue of 4 elements, so one of the results is overwritten. To get them all, you need to pull the results early enough while chip is still hashing. Have a look at the reference driver to check how to do this continuously.


Result validity / real target
Is this correct? Should the final hash be below the target (the "false positive" comment is unclear to me). Guess I need to learn more about cgminer Smiley
What you get back from the chip is a valid Diff1 share, while your pool is obviously asking for higher difficulty shares. That's absolutely normal, i.e. you will see this trace log with every HW that produces Diff1 shares. cgminer then drops all those below pool's difficulty.

Having Diff1 shares returned is a good feedback for you to know that chip is still alive and kicking. But once you know it works stable, the communication load to the A1 chain can be reduced by providing the real difficulty. I have already implemented this in the driver variant for the CoinCraft and will get it into cgminer upstream, but until I have the time here is the related source code snippet:
Code:
uint32_t get_diff(double diff)
{
uint32_t n_bits;
int shift = 29;
double f = (double) 0x0000ffff / diff;
while (f < (double) 0x00008000) {
shift--;
f *= 256.0;
}
while (f >= (double) 0x00800000) {
shift++;
f /= 256.0;
}
n_bits = (int) f + (shift << 24);
return n_bits;
}

static uint8_t *create_job(uint8_t chip_id, uint8_t job_id, struct work *work)
{
static uint8_t job[WRITE_JOB_LENGTH] = {
/* command */
0x00, 0x00,
/* midstate */
0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00,
0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00,
0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00,
0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00,
/* wdata */
0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00,
0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00,
/* start nonce */
0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00,
/* difficulty 1 */
0xff, 0xff, 0x00, 0x1d,
/* end nonce */
0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff,
};
uint8_t *midstate = work->midstate;
uint8_t *wdata = work->data + 64;

uint32_t *p1 = (uint32_t *) &job[34];
uint32_t *p2 = (uint32_t *) wdata;

job[0] = (job_id << 4) | A1_WRITE_JOB;
job[1] = chip_id;

swab256(job + 2, midstate);
p1[0] = bswap_32(p2[0]);
p1[1] = bswap_32(p2[1]);
p1[2] = bswap_32(p2[2]);
p1[4] = get_diff(work->sdiff);
return job;
}

That's maybe not the easiest way (I'm pretty sure that value is available from cgminer structs somewhere), but for now it works.



Good Luck,
zefir
newbie
Activity: 26
Merit: 0

So perhaps I have a nasty bug somewhere…


I brought up the second board we had built up fortunately everything pretty much just worked - getting spoiled with that happening twice in a row Smiley

It still produces the same nonce on your test hash zefir (and it's consistent at a range of clock rates from clock_mux set (12Mhz) to the default PLL at 800Mhz) so I'm pretty sure whatever I'm doing to get this result is outside of the chip.

I have a raspberry pi that should come in tomorrow. When that's here I can hook it up to the spi test headers and validate it against your driver.

In the meantime I cobbled together a really quick and dirty driver for cgminer (based of your bitmine driver) that talks to the micro controller on my board via a UART. It then sends down one item of work and waits for a response (not very speedy!). I get this sort of result in the cgminer logs:

[2014-02-17 18:30:33] BMH_scanwork: nonce=0xbe72021b
[2014-02-17 18:30:33]  Proof: 00000000a670e9d47f911dbe284736a57bb18608989637e1d99b81c8eb3fc1b0
Target: 0000000010000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
TrgVal? no (false positive; hash > target)
[2014-02-17 18:30:33] Share above target
[2014-02-17 18:30:33] YEAH: chip 0: nonce 0xbe72021b

Is this correct? Should the final hash be below the target (the "false positive" comment is unclear to me). Guess I need to learn more about cgminer Smiley

Thanks for any suggestions!
donator
Activity: 919
Merit: 1000
Thanks for fast reply.
I have implemented low level access to the GPIO pins. Will try tomorrow.

Before you do, just a reminder (otherwise you'll kill the chips): you're aware that all pins are 1V8 - if you are using RPi's 3V3 GPIO you need to have level-shifters in place.


Is it me or is this a Datasheet bug?, the first is from datasheet and the 2 behind are from the reference design.

http://oi61.tinypic.com/2n0ndwo.jpg

Seems that there is a mistake in schematics. Check the gerbers to be 100% sure.

Yes, I received several more bugs via PM, which either means this is not the latest revision - or the HW guys tweaked the board after assembly. Unfortunately the eval board was done by external resources, so it will take time to get fixes back into the repository. I'd assume the community will be faster with that.


General comment for the eval board: I have been asked for permission to rebuild the board and sell it. A related license file was added to the git repository today that explicitly allows for that. But please note: this eval board was developed exactly for that - evaluate the chip and bring it up. Design guidelines re signal integrity, efficiency, thermal, etc. were not taken into account as you would do for a final product. Therefore, please consider the design only as reference but not for field deployment.
sr. member
Activity: 335
Merit: 250
Is it me or is this a Datasheet bug?, the first is from datasheet and the 2 behind are from the reference design.

http://oi61.tinypic.com/2n0ndwo.jpg

Seems that there is a mistake in schematics. Check the gerbers to be 100% sure.
member
Activity: 101
Merit: 10
no avatar for now
Picture with parts details is at the bottom :   

Here is my attempt to approximate production costs for 2xA1 DIY PCB.

Another thing visible from this list is various different sources for components, from 4 continents...

and...the amount of minimum ordering items to achieve best pricing.

So my estimate is that (best possible pricing based on this parts) for this DIY board :

- without A1 chips
- without assembly cost
- without transport costs, p&p
- without testing costs

...would be arround 48 USD.

Complexity of this board and chosen parts is not low but not too high either.

However, by choosing even better quality of parts, price of PCB would be higher, but reliability would/might
get "announced" turbo-mode possible with no significant damage to the A1 chips with severe overclocking and heat disipation.

The general problem is I suppose in the cheapest components - resistors, with 5% tollerance, instead od 1 - 2% tollerance max.
I know these PCBs are not CISCO routers or likes, but they have to be brute-forced into not usual working envinment - reason for sensitive component selection process, which to my knowledge was a :

- timing for delivery compromise / pricing compromise, which BITMINE had to do, but such compomise could be avoided in nextgen og Coincraft rigs / PCBs, so let's hope things might be improved in the future.

Some problems with delay might be happening because of the fact that some parts are not easily obtainable, or productions specs, simulator specs and real after production testing specs - differ, and PCBs production delay due to above mentioned reasons (because it can not go as advertised up to full turbo speed) is the result.

Key to understanding how this magnificent CHIP (A1) works is temperature issue....on lower operating temperature, everything works perfect, but the problem begun when Giorgio wanted to produce the best righ in tthe world in a very short time, so I propose to solve this thing this way :

a) deliver rigs - as is
b) develop and test driver patches if that can solve the problem in the future
c) carefully select future batch of components.

Those who receive their rigs first, will earn more, regardless of the absence of turbo more.

Those who receive their rigs later will earn less, but, their rigs might have turbo availability, which is curently as Zefir said and I Quote :

":..only going to be logically available in very cold areas of the globe or with custom cooling/submersion."

Full turbo compliant rigs are / might be possible but not in March...this is my opinion.

See just how many parts they have to source from what companies...and how this is a very hard task, because if only one components is missing the whole production stops.

These boards, are however not the same as those going into desk and rack rigs, but, probably are similar, so you must understand the process and have patience...because I think Giorgio is doing everything he can to do the things right...

w w w . a n o n y . w s / i / 2 0 1 4 / 0 2  / 1 7 / B e P d 3 .  p n g  (remove blanks)

Good works guys, keep the spirit high, since Mt.Gox is getting back in the game (payment withdrowals reinstated) on the very same day (saturday), your first rigs are planned for shipping to customers...

Can somebody comment ?

full member
Activity: 141
Merit: 102
Is it me or is this a Datasheet bug?, the first is from datasheet and the 2 behind are from the reference design.

http://oi61.tinypic.com/2n0ndwo.jpg
sr. member
Activity: 335
Merit: 250
I would like to ask about HW reset signal for raspi. In my version of cgminer is see the following:

Code:
#ifdef NOTYET
a1_nreset_low();
cgsleep_ms(1000);
a1_nreset_hi();
cgsleep_ms(1000);
#endif

So it is not implemented yet. Maybe it is implemented in a newer version of cgminer?

Another question. Can the lack of HW reset at the beginning be responsible for chip not to reply on the 0x04 (RESET) command?

It is not implemented because it is HW dependent. You need to have your means of driving RSTn low and 1V8 high. This can't be done generic, since some design will have a level-shifted GPIO, others an i2c driven GPIO port expander, whatever. Every design will need to have its own HW reset routine implemented in the driver.

As for your second question: yes, it was stated from the beginning and multiple times: you need to always start with a HW reset before you try to access the chain. That is not only for startup, but also for regaining access if chip chain got corrupt (which happens with unstable power or SPI communication failures).



Thanks for fast reply.
I have implemented low level access to the GPIO pins. Will try tomorrow.
donator
Activity: 919
Merit: 1000
I would like to ask about HW reset signal for raspi. In my version of cgminer is see the following:

Code:
#ifdef NOTYET
a1_nreset_low();
cgsleep_ms(1000);
a1_nreset_hi();
cgsleep_ms(1000);
#endif

So it is not implemented yet. Maybe it is implemented in a newer version of cgminer?

Another question. Can the lack of HW reset at the beginning be responsible for chip not to reply on the 0x04 (RESET) command?

It is not implemented because it is HW dependent. You need to have your means of driving RSTn low and 1V8 high. This can't be done generic, since some design will have a level-shifted GPIO, others an i2c driven GPIO port expander, whatever. Every design will need to have its own HW reset routine implemented in the driver.

As for your second question: yes, it was stated from the beginning and multiple times: you need to always start with a HW reset before you try to access the chain. That is not only for startup, but also for regaining access if chip chain got corrupt (which happens with unstable power or SPI communication failures).

sr. member
Activity: 335
Merit: 250
I would like to ask about HW reset signal for raspi. In my version of cgminer is see the following:

Code:
#ifdef NOTYET
a1_nreset_low();
cgsleep_ms(1000);
a1_nreset_hi();
cgsleep_ms(1000);
#endif

So it is not implemented yet. Maybe it is implemented in a newer version of cgminer?

Another question. Can the lack of HW reset at the beginning be responsible for chip not to reply on the 0x04 (RESET) command?
newbie
Activity: 17
Merit: 0
I pulled it from git and compiled it on the RPi yesterday with no issues.  I'm not sure why you'd receive that error.

This source code is only RPi work?

I try to activate Windows 7.

Oh sorry, I thought it was obvious. Already wrote it several times it is designated for Linux and works only if you have an SPI interface in your system.

How do you plan to access it from Windows? If you are using some USB->SPI bridge, check some posts above: drinkmorecoffee and others work toward such approaches that will allow to decouple the driver from the OS. In the driver I provided there is already an initial abstraction from the SPI interface: just write your own spi-context module that wraps direct access to SPI over that bridge (cgminer has already support for MCP2210).

I could help with that once I am done with the SW for Bitmine, but I'm sure it will be already done by then.


That's very good news for DYI users like me who use MCP2210. Cheesy

Use of this product is very easy and the price is cheap.(MCP2210 Breakout Module : 15$...)

http://www.microchip.com/DevelopmentTools/ProductDetails.aspx?PartNO=ADM00419


Please make(or help) cgminer for window.

If your Cgminer can be connected to MCP2210 with A1 chip, Many DYI user will be a great help. Grin





donator
Activity: 919
Merit: 1000
I pulled it from git and compiled it on the RPi yesterday with no issues.  I'm not sure why you'd receive that error.

This source code is only RPi work?

I try to activate Windows 7.

Oh sorry, I thought it was obvious. Already wrote it several times it is designated for Linux and works only if you have an SPI interface in your system.

How do you plan to access it from Windows? If you are using some USB->SPI bridge, check some posts above: drinkmorecoffee and others work toward such approaches that will allow to decouple the driver from the OS. In the driver I provided there is already an initial abstraction from the SPI interface: just write your own spi-context module that wraps direct access to SPI over that bridge (cgminer has already support for MCP2210).

I could help with that once I am done with the SW for Bitmine, but I'm sure it will be already done by then.
newbie
Activity: 40
Merit: 0
I pulled it from git and compiled it on the RPi yesterday with no issues.  I'm not sure why you'd receive that error.

This source code is only RPi work?

I try to activate Windows 7.

Are you doing in MinGW?

you need to change some headers for windows.

#include
#include

newbie
Activity: 17
Merit: 0
I pulled it from git and compiled it on the RPi yesterday with no issues.  I'm not sure why you'd receive that error.

This source code is only RPi work?

I try to activate Windows 7.
Pages:
Jump to: