Author

Topic: OFFICIAL CGMINER mining software thread for linux/win/osx/mips/arm/r-pi 4.11.0 - page 548. (Read 5805728 times)

-ck
legendary
Activity: 4088
Merit: 1631
Ruu \o/
...
His excuse for this was: June-1 GMT+10 log discussion:
[Private log reposted without permission removed]

Still no sign of that 'private' code he wrote more than a month ago ...
So everyone using BFL on a pool that doesn't pay stale shares is getting 5x the number of stale shares with the current code than they should (and also of course luke-jr isn't getting this 5x)
...
So WHO THE FUCK is editing my posts here where I posted IRC discussion from the PUBLIC IRC CHANNEL #cgminer on FreeNet?

You better have a good reason for it.
There's certainly nothing private about the #cgminer logs as far as I'm concerned, otherwise it wouldn't be an open public channel.
-ck
legendary
Activity: 4088
Merit: 1631
Ruu \o/
May want to take a look at the windows binary.

Getting 1.5Mh/s on my 5870s with the new 2.4.4.   Undecided
Others are using this binary without any problems and I can't think of anything that would do this. I suggest you delete any .bin files you have and start again, or just extract it fresh and start again, doing the windows three finger salute (reboot) first.
legendary
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1000
DiabloMiner author
...
His excuse for this was: June-1 GMT+10 log discussion:
[Private log reposted without permission removed]

Still no sign of that 'private' code he wrote more than a month ago ...
So everyone using BFL on a pool that doesn't pay stale shares is getting 5x the number of stale shares with the current code than they should (and also of course luke-jr isn't getting this 5x)
...
So WHO THE FUCK is editing my posts here where I posted IRC discussion from the PUBLIC IRC CHANNEL #cgminer on FreeNet?

You better have a good reason for it.

luke-jr flagged your posts saying they were "illegal log posting", but I ignored his mod request. One of the other mods must have done it.
legendary
Activity: 4634
Merit: 1851
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
...
His excuse for this was: June-1 GMT+10 log discussion:
[Private log reposted without permission removed]

Still no sign of that 'private' code he wrote more than a month ago ...
So everyone using BFL on a pool that doesn't pay stale shares is getting 5x the number of stale shares with the current code than they should (and also of course luke-jr isn't getting this 5x)
...
So WHO THE FUCK is editing my posts here where I posted IRC discussion from the PUBLIC IRC CHANNEL #cgminer on FreeNet?

You better have a good reason for it.
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 250
Why is it so damn hot in here?
May want to take a look at the windows binary.

Getting 1.5Mh/s on my 5870s with the new 2.4.4.   Undecided
-ck
legendary
Activity: 4088
Merit: 1631
Ruu \o/
So systems without opencl.dll and sdk dont need to specifically recompile for this version?

Kind regards
If you use my precompiled binary you need opencl.dll. If you build it yourself it will require whatever you build it for.
member
Activity: 112
Merit: 10
So systems without opencl.dll and sdk dont need to specifically recompile for this version?

Kind regards
hero member
Activity: 591
Merit: 500
Performance should be pretty much dependent on intensity so it will be very different to before since it appears you're going up to intensity 4 where previously it would have been stuck at 0 +/- 1.
I'm getting anywhere from 2 to 6 now. Before, it basically topped out at 4.
-ck
legendary
Activity: 4088
Merit: 1631
Ruu \o/
Getting this with 2.4.4.

Code:
GPU 0: 290.3 / 289.7 Mh/s | A:74  R:0  HW:0  U:3.65/m  I:4
73.0 C  F: 74% (3049 RPM)  E: 960 MHz  M: 860 Mhz  V: 1.175V  A: 98% P: 0%
Last initialised: [2012-07-01 00:41:44]
Intensity: Dynamic (only one thread in use)
Thread 0: 146.9 Mh/s Enabled ALIVE
Thread 1: 146.1 Mh/s Enabled ALIVE

It says there's only 1 thread in use, but it shows both threads as being active. Is that right? Performance seems much better at least; ~20 MH/s better than 2.4.3.
Odd, disables here:

Intensity: Dynamic (only one thread in use)
Thread 0: 190.1 Mh/s Enabled ALIVE
Thread 1: 0.0 Mh/s Enabled ALIVE paused

Performance should be pretty much dependent on intensity so it will be very different to before since it appears you're going up to intensity 4 where previously it would have been stuck at 0 +/- 1.
hero member
Activity: 591
Merit: 500
Getting this with 2.4.4.

Code:
GPU 0: 290.3 / 289.7 Mh/s | A:74  R:0  HW:0  U:3.65/m  I:4
73.0 C  F: 74% (3049 RPM)  E: 960 MHz  M: 860 Mhz  V: 1.175V  A: 98% P: 0%
Last initialised: [2012-07-01 00:41:44]
Intensity: Dynamic (only one thread in use)
Thread 0: 146.9 Mh/s Enabled ALIVE
Thread 1: 146.1 Mh/s Enabled ALIVE

It says there's only 1 thread in use, but it shows both threads as being active. Is that right? Performance seems much better at least; ~20 MH/s better than 2.4.3.
legendary
Activity: 952
Merit: 1000
I clearly have trust issues with anything luke-jr says ... maybe others do too? Smiley
You should work on those issues. Would be more productive than posting lies on the forum.
The problem with that statement is:
Prove anywhere one lie you say I have said ... anywhere ...

I'm sorry, but Kano > luke-jr, time and time again...
legendary
Activity: 4634
Merit: 1851
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
... and anyone looking for an Xubuntu 11.04 compile of 2.4.4
-> cgminer-2.4.4a at the top of https://github.com/kanoi/cgminer/downloads
(I'm running this executable at the moment on both my rigs)
-ck
legendary
Activity: 4088
Merit: 1631
Ruu \o/
New version - 2.4.4, 1st July 2012

I plugged my main PC's hard drive into an external USB reader to allow me to build this on my laptop since I really wanted this release out.

Human readable changelog:
Massive overhaul of the nrolltime mechanism now should cause a huge rise in efficiency on pools that support it. This allows much lower getwork bandwidth for much higher hashrates.
Support for the expire= feature. This works in concert with nrolltime when pools support it to allow more local generation of work.
Support for the x-mining-hashrate feature. I'm sure some pool somewhere cares about this, even though I'm not convinced, but it was trivial to add.
Better damping of GPU temperature changes should cause much less overshoot when temps rise or fall outside the optimal range in autofan mode.
Reinstated the application restart should adl fail - disabling this did not fix the crashes for those who had cgminer crash after 1 week of uptime in windows fail land when their ATI driver would fail, and disabled the advantage of it fixing the problem for those who simply lost their fanspeed.
API groups features - this is squarely aimed at grouping privileges for remote access for services like P4man's hopping puppetmaster service.
Support for unlimited devices
Support for unlimited pools
Massive fix for the "dynamic" feature for GPUs. Somehow in the many device abstractions it had gotten broken and wasn't really doing what it was intended. It should be much more dynamic now.
FPGA fixes.
Fixes for builds on other platforms.
Lots of other things under the hood.


Full changelog
- Fix builds on non gnu platforms.
- api.c ensure old mode is always available when not using --api-groups + quit()
on param errors
- Implement rudimentary X-Mining-Hashrate support.
- Detect large swings in temperature when below the target temperature range and
change fan by amounts dependant on the value of tdiff.
- Adjust the fanspeed by the magnitude of the temperature difference when in the
optimal range.
- Revert "Restarting cgminer from within after ADL has been corrupted only leads
to a crash. Display a warning only and disable fanspeed monitoring."
- api.c fix json already closed
- implement and document API option --api-groups
- Put upper bounds to under 2 hours that work can be rolled into the future for
bitcoind will deem it invalid beyond that.
- define API option --api-groups
- api.c allow unwell devices to be enabled so they can be cured
- miner.php - fix/enable autorefresh for custom pages
- miner.php allow custom summary pages - new 'Mobile' summary
- Work around pools that advertise very low expire= time inappropriately as this
leads to many false positives for stale shares detected.
- Only show ztex board count if any exist.
- There is no need for work to be a union in struct workio_cmd
- fpgautils.c include a debug message for all unknown open errors
- Don't keep rolling work right up to the expire= cut off. Use 2/3 of the time
between the scantime and the expiry as cutoff for reusing work.
- Log a specific error when serial opens fail due to lack of user permissions
- Increase GPU timing resolution to microsecond and add sanity check to ensure
times are positive.
- Opencl code may start executing before the clfinish order is given to it so
get the start timing used for dynamic intensity from before the kernel is
queued.
- fpgautils.c - set BAUD rate according to termio spec
- fpgautils.c - linux ordering back to the correct way
- miner.php remove unneeded '.'s
- miner.php add auto refresh options
- miner.php add 'restart' next to 'quit'
- miner.php make fontname/size configurable with myminer.php
- Make the pools array a dynamically allocated array to allow unlimited pools to
be added.
- Make the devices array a dynamically allocated array of pointers to allow
unlimited devices.
- Dynamic intensity for GPUs should be calculated on a per device basis. Clean
up the code to only calculate it if required as well.
- Use a queueing bool set under control_lock to prevent multiple calls to
queue_request racing.
- Use the work clone flag to determine if we should subtract it from the total
queued variable and provide a subtract queued function to prevent looping over
locked code.
- Don't decrement staged extras count from longpoll work.
- Count longpoll's contribution to the queue.
- Increase queued count before pushing message.
- Test we have enough work queued for pools with and without rolltime
capability.
- As work is sorted by age, we can discard the oldest work at regular intervals
to keep only 1 of the newest work items per mining thread.
- Roll work again after duplicating it to prevent duplicates on return to the
clone function.
- Abstract out work cloning and clone $mining_threads copies whenever a rollable
work item is found and return a clone instead.
- api.c display Pool Av in json
- Take into account average getwork delay as a marker of pool communications
when considering work stale.
- Work out a rolling average getwork delay stored in pool_stats.
- Getwork delay in stats should include retries for each getwork call.
- Walk through the thread list instead of searching for them when disabling
threads for dynamic mode.
- Extend nrolltime to support the expiry= parameter. Do this by turning the
rolltime bool into an integer set to the expiry time. If the pool supports
rolltime but not expiry= then set the expiry time to the standard scantime.
- When disabling fanspeed monitoring on adl failure, remove any twin GPU
association. This could have been leading to hangs on machines with dual GPU
cards when ADL failed.
- modminer: Don't delay 2nd+ FPGAs during work restart
- Disable OpenCL code when not available.
- Fix openwrt crashing on regeneratehash() by making check_solve a noop.
- FPGA - allow device detect override without an open failure
- Fix sign warning.
legendary
Activity: 4634
Merit: 1851
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
I clearly have trust issues with anything luke-jr says ... maybe others do too? Smiley
You should work on those issues. Would be more productive than posting lies on the forum.
The problem with that statement is:
Prove anywhere one lie you say I have said ... anywhere ...
legendary
Activity: 2576
Merit: 1186
I clearly have trust issues with anything luke-jr says ... maybe others do too? Smiley
You should work on those issues. Would be more productive than posting lies on the forum.
legendary
Activity: 4634
Merit: 1851
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
...
So while I appreciate Con's contributions, and would welcome his joining in on the FPGA/ASIC driver side, it isn't fair to say "the community doesn't care one bit about what software they're mining with" just because they don't see a need to buy hardware for a new developer for what is already working fine and maintained. That being said, don't let this stop anyone from buying Con some FPGAs or ASICs - his contributions to CGMiner are more than worth what they cost.

In short:
  • FPGA support in CGMiner has always been my work, and plan to keep maintaining it in any case
  • Con's contributions to general CGMiner code (and GPUs!) is appreciated and great quality code; I'd love to have him contribute to FPGA/ASIC drivers in the future
  • Please do donate to Con, including FPGAs/ASICs, for his past and possibly future contributions - but don't get the wrong impression that FPGA/ASIC support will change or degrade if you choose not to
Unfortunately, this is actually clearly an exaggeration to the point of being incorrect.

luke-jr wrote the first FPGA module which was support for the BFL.

Xiangfu wrote the first support for the Icarus based on Luke-jr's BFL code but even back then had to rewrite enough of it to make it work properly - back with the first release of the Icarus code my involvement was to help debug Xiangfu's code and get it working.

nelisky wrote the entire ztex support and luke-jr has had nothing to do with that at all.

By this point I had rewritten some of the Icarus code, extended it and also added the only performance gains to it so far: LP abort, 10x setup speed and optimising the abort time to reduce getworks
The only non-trivial change that luke-jr initiated for Icarus (even in his fork) was to close and re-open the serial port every time it sent work to the Icarus to avoid a problem with the serial port not working due to a problem with his linux kernel he was using - which I requested he instead determine when there was a serial port problem and then close and re-open it (since it was such a rare problem) - but he refused to.

I requested he change the BFL code to abort work on an LP to stop wasting work (on average half a nonce per LP) - of course only if the pool doesn't accept or need stale work - but again he refused to do it (and still hasn't)
The side affect for anyone mining on a pool that doesn't pay stale shares, is that the BFL code now gets 5x the stale shares compared to GPU and Icarus when you factor in the MH/s speed
(i.e. if you incorrectly ignore the MH/s difference BFL is 10x the number of stale shares vs Icarus)
Feel free to view my rigs (2xICA, 1xBFL, 1x6950) to verify this:
http://207.36.180.49/miner.php?ref=0&pg=Mobile
(N.B. that page is very slow to load and I will remove it from this post some time in the future)

His excuse for this was: June-1 GMT+10 log discussion:
The next MOD that decides to remove this BETTER HELL ASK ME FIRST OR HAVE A GOOD EXCUSE
other than pandering to a bull shit request from Luke-jr and helping hide his lies ... got that gmaxwell?
The PUBLIC FreeNode IRC #cgminer channel that anyone can be in - including you have been in - is NOT private in any way

[Private log reposted without permission removed]
Code:
12:50 < luke-jr> kanoi: Bitforce still can't interrupt work like Icarus can
12:50 <@kanoi> it can't abort work at all?
12:51 < luke-jr> not the same way Icarus does
12:51 <@kanoi> I know that
12:51  * luke-jr isn't really interested in working around BFL's screwups, especially when there's a proper fix coming "any day now"
12:51 <@kanoi> if the work isn't submit-stale and cgminer isn't submit stale then aborting the work will be a clear increase in performance
12:52 <@kanoi> very simple and obvious
12:52 < luke-jr> that's nice, but it isn't what I'm doing.
12:53 <@kanoi> you don't like obvious simple performance increases ... :P
12:53 <@kanoi> lol
12:53 < luke-jr> no, I do. I just don't push it upstream when it's an ugly hack that gives BFL a way out of fixing it properly.
12:53 < luke-jr> my private branch aborts BF jobs when the block hash changes

Still no sign of that 'private' code he wrote more than a month ago ...
So everyone using BFL on a pool that doesn't pay stale shares is getting 5x the number of stale shares with the current code than they should (and also of course luke-jr isn't getting this 5x)

luke-jr wrote the support for MMQ
(I wont get into the issues with that code now ...)

luke-jr added support for the BFL Rig Box (similar to the BFL single)

Now for the actual commits in the commit log with our names on them I did:
 git log | grep Author | grep -i (kolivas or kano or luke)
Matching the following words:
kolivas: 1659
kano: 198
luke: 78

This of course includes git management by ckolivas, however, git management is just as important as writing code for the git

Now I wont make any exact meaning of those numbers - but feel free to analyse the results if you wish.

I clearly have trust issues with anything luke-jr says ... maybe others do too? Smiley
legendary
Activity: 2576
Merit: 1186
The 7970 crowd sourcing went pretty well, and that was for a $500+ component. A 3.5 Gh/s BFL Jalapeno is only $187 including international shipping...

You could set up an address, and when it gets to 30 BTC, order a unit.
It did indeed and I was most impressed by the community's generosity at the time. I had issues with FPGA and never wanted to invest or even develop for them because they really did not look like they'd ever pay themselves off - and indeed if ASIC really does come in any time in the next year, pretty much not one single FPGA will have made a profit before they're defunct technology and just doorstops. On the other hand I can still sell my GPUs if they become defunct technology and they've never made a loss. ASIC is a different beast entirely. They polarise the issue into one of being 100% you MUST bet on bitcoin being successful, like FPGAs, but they are very different in that they will also be the ONLY way to make a profit mining should they eventuate.

Personally I don't like sending money into a black hole and hoping the universe will spit out a device in response. I'm disappointed, but not remotely surprised, by BFL's silence in response to my emails and polite posts on the forum. To be able to code a meaningful set of device drivers for their devices I would need access to each of the devices on offer. I'm not expecting anyone to donate a $30k device, but the lower spec devices would be very reasonable sponsorship for the work, and at least giving me temporary remote access to develop for the $30k device would be beneficial for all in my opinion. On the other hand, if the community doesn't care one bit about what software they're mining with, and a software solution arises that is a "turn on and it just mines", I'm just wasting my time here. That is definitely a huge factor in my thought process.
BFL devices are already supported. It seems there is a general misunderstanding on this topic here: while Con has always done a great job maintaining CGMiner as a GPU miner, including the core code dealing with pool requests and ncurses TUI... his involvement with CGMiner support for FPGAs has always been minimal; FPGA and multi-device support in CGMiner is my work, and I plan to continue maintaining it (including maintaining the pool/ncurses code if Con leaves) as well as extend it to work with ASICs. In other words, even if Con does receive FPGAs/ASICs and begins contributing code for them, that is a change from the status quo. Perhaps it was a mistake to label BFGMiner as a fork of CGMiner - while true from a "who has the repository" perspective, the opposite is true in a more practical sense of maintainership: in that respect, CGMiner-of-today is a fork of BFGMiner.

So while I appreciate Con's contributions, and would welcome his joining in on the FPGA/ASIC driver side, it isn't fair to say "the community doesn't care one bit about what software they're mining with" just because they don't see a need to buy hardware for a new developer for what is already working fine and maintained. That being said, don't let this stop anyone from buying Con some FPGAs or ASICs - his contributions to CGMiner are more than worth what they cost.

In short:
  • FPGA support in CGMiner has always been my work, and plan to keep maintaining it in any case
  • Con's contributions to general CGMiner code (and GPUs!) is appreciated and great quality code; I'd love to have him contribute to FPGA/ASIC drivers in the future
  • Please do donate to Con, including FPGAs/ASICs, for his past and possibly future contributions - but don't get the wrong impression that FPGA/ASIC support will change or degrade if you choose not to
-ck
legendary
Activity: 4088
Merit: 1631
Ruu \o/
Couple of questions come to mind...
- Will getting you a BFL ASIC based something help with developing cgminer for it?
- OpenASIC?
1. Precisely why I tried getting sponsorship from BFL themselves in the form of hardware, so yes.
2. Not my area of expertise and the project progress appears slow...
sr. member
Activity: 349
Merit: 250
re: The ASIC revolution

I'm in two minds about what I'll do if/when the ASIC revolution comes. I've tried to engage BFL as potentially developing software for their hardware somehow sponsored by them, but they're completely silent in response. Furthermore any software developed to drive them will likely be based on existing fgpa code which I had no input into, which means that if I don't do the development, it will be luke-jr who does as the fpga code was done by luke-jr who now maintains a semi-hostile fork of cgminer and I guess he's ideally positioned to take over maintainership of the project entirely as that fork if I pull out. I'd hate my baby to end entirely in his hands but it's looking inevitable unless I fork cash out to BFL who I don't even trust, to do the code for their own hardware. They obviously realise they'll corner the market in the interim regardless of what their software and community support will be like so they are guaranteed to make huge profits and they need not engage the community and developer(s) in a positive way.

I will most definitely be maintaining cgminer and actively developing it right up to the moment some real ASIC hardware appears, so don't think I'm abandoning anything any time soon. Ironically a lot of the recent development has been towards making cgminer scale to massive hashrates, devices and pools.

Comments please.

Couple of questions come to mind...
- Will getting you a BFL ASIC based something help with developing cgminer for it?
- OpenASIC?
legendary
Activity: 2912
Merit: 1060
I noticed something was fishy when they recommended another miner, I tried it, disgusting!
Jump to: