February 08, 2025, 05:02:24 AM

Welcome, Guest

News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 28.0 [Torrent]

Bitcoin Forum>Bitcoin>Mining>Mining software (miners)

Pages:

Author

Topic: OFFICIAL CGMINER mining software thread for linux/win/osx/mips/arm/r-pi 4.11.0 - page 542. (Read 5806088 times)

kano

legendary

Legendary level

Activity: 4634

Merit: 1851

Linux since 1997 RedHat 4

Quote from: GenTarkin on July 07, 2012, 02:16:17 AM

I couldnt easily find this anywhere, but whats the proper json format for the new "restricted access" feature? vs full access for remote API accessing of cgminer?

I'm not really sure exactly what you mean by your question - but the API-README contains all the info about the API ...

Edit: If you mean the command line parameters then they are in README for the basic command definitions and more details in API-README

TechCF

member

Activity: 109

Merit: 10

Just built this on OSX 10.7.4, but I have trouble getting --enable-bitforce to work, and beeing a newbie on these kind of things I would like if anybody can help. If I can be of any help, I built it with these steps:

installed Xcode via App Store
sudo port install pkgconfig curl +ssl
./configure --enable-cpumining
sudo make install

The error I get when trying with --enable-bitforce is:

Code:

  CC       cgminer-fpgautils.o
fpgautils.c: In function ‘serial_open’:
fpgautils.c:214: error: ‘CBAUD’ undeclared (first use in this function)
fpgautils.c:214: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once
fpgautils.c:214: error: for each function it appears in.)
make[1]: *** [cgminer-fpgautils.o] Error 1
make: *** [install-recursive] Error 1

EDIT: Btw: You must use -w 64 because of the OSX OpenCL bug. And, if you have two adapters, it seems that the weaker one is device 1, and the discrete is 0. E.g. in the mid-2009 MBP: Device 0 is the 9600M and device 1 is the 9400M.

rav3n_pl

legendary

Legendary level

Activity: 1361

Merit: 1003

Don`t panic! Organize!

Quote from: -ck on July 07, 2012, 03:06:57 AM

Quote from: rav3n_pl on July 07, 2012, 01:39:04 AM

OS: Win7 64
Driver: 12.6
Card: XFX 6770
Cgminer: 2.5.0
It is still hanging after a while if NOT use --no-adl ... It can be ever fixed somehow?
Or can I do something to debug that?

Being a windows driver bug, there really is nothing I can do about it apart from suggesting trying a different driver version. I'm surprised you hit this bug so quickly after 2.5.0 though since most people find it hitting after a week of running.

Mayeb add some async watchdog that will detect stuck miner (lock over 1 minute), ignore ADL for a while using safe settings (fan on 99%) then try restart it?

-ck

legendary

Legendary level

Activity: 4088

Merit: 1631

Ruu \o/

Quote from: rav3n_pl on July 07, 2012, 01:39:04 AM

OS: Win7 64
Driver: 12.6
Card: XFX 6770
Cgminer: 2.5.0
It is still hanging after a while if NOT use --no-adl ... It can be ever fixed somehow?
Or can I do something to debug that?

Being a windows driver bug, there really is nothing I can do about it apart from suggesting trying a different driver version. I'm surprised you hit this bug so quickly after 2.5.0 though since most people find it hitting after a week of running.

GenTarkin

legendary

Legendary level

Activity: 2450

Merit: 1002

I couldnt easily find this anywhere, but whats the proper json format for the new "restricted access" feature? vs full access for remote API accessing of cgminer?

DiabloD3

legendary

Legendary level

Activity: 1162

Merit: 1000

DiabloMiner author

Quote from: -ck on July 06, 2012, 10:22:12 PM

Quote from: Luke-Jr on July 06, 2012, 10:19:24 PM

Quote from: -ck on July 06, 2012, 10:14:42 PM

Quote from: Luke-Jr on July 06, 2012, 10:13:31 PM

Quote from: dave3 on July 06, 2012, 09:47:52 PM

After running 2.5.0 overnight, the reported rejects are only 0.5% now vs. 1.5% before (with the BFL singles).

That's (partly) because they're not reported. There's also about as many valid shares being silently dropped, as the shares actually being prevented.

GET THE FUCK OUT OF MY FORUM THREAD WITH YOUR FUD

Speaking the truth by calling out false claims is not FUD.

You now have the dubious honour of being the first ever person on this forum I've ignored.

Surprised it took so long.

rav3n_pl

legendary

Legendary level

Activity: 1361

Merit: 1003

Don`t panic! Organize!

OS: Win7 64
Driver: 12.6
Card: XFX 6770
Cgminer: 2.5.0
It is still hanging after a while if NOT use --no-adl ... It can be ever fixed somehow?
Or can I do something to debug that?

-ck

legendary

Legendary level

Activity: 4088

Merit: 1631

Ruu \o/

Quote from: Luke-Jr on July 06, 2012, 10:19:24 PM

Quote from: -ck on July 06, 2012, 10:14:42 PM

Quote from: Luke-Jr on July 06, 2012, 10:13:31 PM

Quote from: dave3 on July 06, 2012, 09:47:52 PM

After running 2.5.0 overnight, the reported rejects are only 0.5% now vs. 1.5% before (with the BFL singles).

That's (partly) because they're not reported. There's also about as many valid shares being silently dropped, as the shares actually being prevented.

GET THE FUCK OUT OF MY FORUM THREAD WITH YOUR FUD

Speaking the truth by calling out false claims is not FUD.

You now have the dubious honour of being the first ever person on this forum I've ignored.

crazyates

legendary

Legendary level

Activity: 952

Merit: 1000

Quote from: -ck on July 06, 2012, 10:14:42 PM

Quote from: Luke-Jr on July 06, 2012, 10:13:31 PM

Quote from: dave3 on July 06, 2012, 09:47:52 PM

After running 2.5.0 overnight, the reported rejects are only 0.5% now vs. 1.5% before (with the BFL singles).

That's (partly) because they're not reported. There's also about as many valid shares being silently dropped, as the shares actually being prevented.

GET THE FUCK OUT OF MY FORUM THREAD WITH YOUR FUD

This was my face when I read that: Grin

Grin

Luke-Jr

legendary

Legendary level

Activity: 2576

Merit: 1186

Quote from: -ck on July 06, 2012, 10:14:42 PM

Quote from: Luke-Jr on July 06, 2012, 10:13:31 PM

Quote from: dave3 on July 06, 2012, 09:47:52 PM

After running 2.5.0 overnight, the reported rejects are only 0.5% now vs. 1.5% before (with the BFL singles).

That's (partly) because they're not reported. There's also about as many valid shares being silently dropped, as the shares actually being prevented.

GET THE FUCK OUT OF MY FORUM THREAD WITH YOUR FUD

Speaking the truth by calling out false claims is not FUD.

-ck

legendary

Legendary level

Activity: 4088

Merit: 1631

Ruu \o/

Quote from: Luke-Jr on July 06, 2012, 10:13:31 PM

Quote from: dave3 on July 06, 2012, 09:47:52 PM

After running 2.5.0 overnight, the reported rejects are only 0.5% now vs. 1.5% before (with the BFL singles).

That's (partly) because they're not reported. There's also about as many valid shares being silently dropped, as the shares actually being prevented.

GET THE FUCK OUT OF MY FORUM THREAD WITH YOUR FUD

Luke-Jr

legendary

Legendary level

Activity: 2576

Merit: 1186

Quote from: dave3 on July 06, 2012, 09:47:52 PM

After running 2.5.0 overnight, the reported rejects are only 0.5% now vs. 1.5% before (with the BFL singles).

That's (partly) because they're not reported. There's also about as many valid shares being silently dropped, as the shares actually being prevented.

-ck

legendary

Legendary level

Activity: 4088

Merit: 1631

Ruu \o/

Quote from: dave3 on July 06, 2012, 09:47:52 PM

After running 2.5.0 overnight, the reported rejects are only 0.5% now vs. 1.5% before (with the BFL singles).

Thanks for the feedback. That was one of the improvements mentioned that I finally got sick of the arguments over and coded up the solution myself. Glad it works for you

dave3

sr. member

Activity: 344

Merit: 250

After running 2.5.0 overnight, the reported rejects are only 0.5% now vs. 1.5% before (with the BFL singles).

farfie

newbie

Activity: 63

Merit: 0

Quote from: P_Shep on July 06, 2012, 12:44:04 PM

I don't think it means anything.
AFAIK, DW is work requests that have been discarded for whatever reason. Work that has not be started, just retrieved from the server then thrown away.

I typically get 10-15% discards.

Yes, I believe I spoke too soon. After closer inspection, it seems upon detection of a new block, it dumps everything under - I'm guessing - ST to DW. Just getting rid of old work that has not been processed yet for a block that matters none anymore.

For some reason it seems as though one of the miners always takes about 5 or 6 seconds longer to realize there's a new block. Maybe because of the lack of long poll, the prompt with higher hash speed will always notice first because it needs to send something to realize it's not longer relevant. This would suggest that if you have to use multiple computers to host your gpu's/devices, you should try to spread hash speed as evenly as possible. For solo mining of course, where with long poll this wouldn't matter. At least this is my guess. Not related to CGMiner I know, but I wanted to put it anyway Tongue

Tongue

P_Shep

legendary

Legendary level

Activity: 1795

Merit: 1208

This is not OK.

Quote from: farfie on July 06, 2012, 12:38:07 PM

I'd like to chime in and say that after upgrading to CGminer 2.5.0, I'm getting an increased number when dividing DW by Q while solo mining. Doing this USED to get me ~ .003 - .006 in BFGminer 2.4.4. Now I'm getting above .01 on 2 different machines, both running Win 7x64. To be honest I'm not even sure doing this math means anything while solo mining, but it's what I've been doing to try and see how much work has been useless, and I can't see it being a good thing. Running 11 singles with a couple odd gpu's in 2 different cmd prompts across 2 machines.

Do these numbers actually mean nothing when solo mining or..? I figured I'd post this just in case. Maybe it was for naught

I don't think it means anything.
AFAIK, DW is work requests that have been discarded for whatever reason. Work that has not be started, just retrieved from the server then thrown away.

I typically get 10-15% discards.

farfie

newbie

Activity: 63

Merit: 0

I'd like to chime in and say that after upgrading to CGminer 2.5.0, I'm getting an increased number when dividing DW by Q while solo mining. Doing this USED to get me ~ .003 - .006 in BFGminer 2.4.4. Now I'm getting above .01 on 2 different machines, both running Win 7x64. To be honest I'm not even sure doing this math means anything while solo mining, but it's what I've been doing to try and see how much work has been useless, and I can't see it being a good thing. Running 11 singles with a couple odd gpu's in 2 different cmd prompts across 2 machines.

Do these numbers actually mean nothing when solo mining or..? I figured I'd post this just in case. Maybe it was for naught

BitMinerN8

hero member

Activity: 626

Merit: 500

Mining since May 2011.

Just upgraded to cgminer 2.5.0 on BAMT 0.5, so far so good with 5 BFLs, 1 GPU.

The00Dustin

hero member

Activity: 807

Merit: 500

Quote from: P_Shep on July 06, 2012, 11:42:17 AM

It does in Linux, and that's what I'm mainly using

Fair enough. For some reason, I was thinking you were specifically discussing Windows. Either I crossed this conversation with another one in the same thread or I confused the -S designations for Windows vs Linux (I don't own any BFL product to help keep this straight in my head, and I was only trying to help).

P_Shep

legendary

Legendary level

Activity: 1795

Merit: 1208

This is not OK.

It does in Linux, and that's what I'm mainly using

Pages:

Bitcoin Forum>Bitcoin>Mining>Mining software (miners)

Jump to: