Hello! I have Xeon E5-2678 v3 CPU (12C, 24T, 30M L3 Chache) and i create bat file for hexxcoin: cpuminer-aes-avx2 -a zoin -o stratum+tcp://hexx.suprnova.cc:2876 -u Worker.Rig -p 1979 --cpu-affinity 0x555 --cpu-priority 2 I get 1900H/s. and i create another bat-file: cpuminer-aes-avx2 -a zoin -o stratum+tcp://hexx.suprnova.cc:2876 -u Worker.Rig -p 1979 --cpu-affinity 0x8191 --cpu-priority 2 and i get 2100H/s. How to choose the correct --cpu-affinity option in my case? Using "zoin" algo, you don't need to worry about affinities or priorities. Just create as many threads as you want and let Windows (or Linux) decide the affinities by itself. In your case: cpuminer-aes-avx2 -a zoin -t <threads> -o stratum+tcp://hexx.suprnova.cc:2876 -u Worker.Rig -p 1979 --cpu-priority 2 Use <threads> as any number from 1 to 24. (I hope joblo agrees with me on this one)  |
|
|
|
You can also use 0x0F0F or other combinations, providing there are only 4 CPUs (bits) active on first two digits and 4 on second. I hope all is clear now Almost. Won't a mask of 0xf0f0 result in 4 idle cores and 4 cores with 2 threads each. Don't you want one thread per physical core? What are the masks to have only one thread per physical core (2 cores/4 threads CPUs (Core i3/i5) nd 4 cores/8 thread CPUs (Core i7)) ? ZenFr, 2C/4T 0xA or 0x5 4C/8T 0xAA or 0x55 edit: onedeveloper, I was mis-remembering the L3 cache structure on the Ryzen, it's a unified 8mb victim cache per CCX not 2mb L3 victim cache per core. Still, there is a cache bandwidth issue and the nature of the victim cache means that if 8mb per CCX is reached then it starts moving data to the other CCX or if it is full as well it moves to system ram. If you mask 0x5 on Ryzen you mask the process to logical processor 0 and 2, core 1 and 2 of CCX 1. If you mask 0xA on Ryzen you mask the process to logical processor 1 and 3, core 1 and 2 of CCX 1. I read this reddit thread -> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/5ybrxn/ryzen_7_is_actually_behaving_like_a_dual_4c8t/They linked this image:  Still, they don't explain how windows manages CPU affinities, but the secret is finding the physical CCX for each CPU thread (logical CPU) and adjust the mask accordingly. User "giaggio" used that mask I said above and had a good result: 640 hashes at only 35 Watts (due to the iddle threads/cores on each CCX). |
|
|
|
You can also use 0x0F0F or other combinations, providing there are only 4 CPUs (bits) active on first two digits and 4 on second. I hope all is clear now Almost. Won't a mask of 0xf0f0 result in 4 idle cores and 4 cores with 2 threads each. Don't you want one thread per physical core? Yes. 4 Idle cores per CCX. You don't earn better hash power on Cryptonight once you cover your L3 cache and each CCX has only 8MB cache, so 4 threads per CCX plus 4 threads free for playing DOTA2 and do some browsing at the same time  |
|
|
|
I must "enter the fray" because I see coinbutter is making a mistake. Take this notes into account. - The CPU affinity treats the bits as flags for each logical CPU. In Windows >= 8 one can look into the task manager to find how many CPUs is recognizing.
- Each bit represents a CPU, as joblo said, being bit 0 the zeroth CPU, bit 1 the 1st, and so on.
- On Ryzen case, as you know, the CPUS are organized in two blocks of 8 CPUS on each CCX, sharing a common 8MB cache each. This limits the number of threads per CCX for cryptonight to 8MB/2MB = 4 threads.
- It doesn't matter which logical CPU gets the threads on each CCX. The maximum must be 4.
- As each thread is a bit, Ryzen masks have 16 bits, i.e. 4 hexadecimal digits.
- The hexadecimal numbers are represented high-bit to low-bit, so the first 1 is the 16th CPU in Ryzen case.
- If you want to use the maximum 8 threads in Ryzen 7, you must use 4 threads in 1st CCX and other 4 in 2nd.
- A mask like 0xF0F0 is enoug. This means that 8 threads will be assigned to the logical CPUs 15, 14, 13, 12 (second CCX) and 7, 6, 5, 4 (first CCX). The rest of the CPUs will be left free and useable for any other task.
How to mine: cpuminer-aes-avx2 -a cryptonight -o <your_pool_here> -u <your_user> -p <your_password> -t 8 --cpu-affinity 0xF0F0 You can also use 0x0F0F or other combinations, providing there are only 4 CPUs (bits) active on first two digits and 4 on second. I hope all is clear now |
|
|
|
|
Maybe it's just the compiler doing its optimization work. I had the same workload on my computer on every test, so I was as surprised as you. I also checked the source code and it's true there's no AVX2 code there.
|
|
|
|
I was piqued with your selection of algos so I decided to try them on my Windows 8.1 machine. This is the result for AVX version of "deep" algo: CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-4200U CPU @ 1.60GHz
CPU features: SSE2 AES AVX AVX2
SW built on Mar 31 2017 with GCC 4.8.3
SW features: SSE2 AES AVX
Algo features: SSE2 AES AVX AVX2
Start mining with SSE2 AES AVX
[2017-04-04 16:31:20] 4 miner threads started, using 'deep' algorithm.
[2017-04-04 16:31:31] CPU #3: 2097.15 kH, 182.74 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:31:31] Total: 2097.15 kH, 182.74 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:31:31] CPU #2: 2097.15 kH, 182.49 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:31:31] CPU #0: 2097.15 kH, 177.66 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:31:32] CPU #1: 2097.15 kH, 175.57 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:31:36] CPU #1: 702.27 kH, 171.87 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:31:36] CPU #2: 912.45 kH, 183.92 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:31:36] CPU #3: 913.69 kH, 182.45 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:31:36] Total: 4625.55 kH, 715.90 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:31:36] CPU #0: 888.29 kH, 180.76 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:31:41] CPU #1: 859.36 kH, 172.99 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:31:41] CPU #2: 919.62 kH, 183.39 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:31:41] CPU #3: 912.25 kH, 183.06 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:31:41] Total: 3579.51 kH, 720.20 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:31:41] CPU #0: 903.81 kH, 179.12 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:31:44] CTRL_C_EVENT received, exiting
And this is the same test using AVX2: CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-4200U CPU @ 1.60GHz
CPU features: SSE2 AES AVX AVX2
SW built on Mar 31 2017 with GCC 4.8.3
SW features: SSE2 AES AVX AVX2
Algo features: SSE2 AES AVX AVX2
Start mining with SSE2 AES AVX2
[2017-04-04 16:30:52] 4 miner threads started, using 'deep' algorithm.
[2017-04-04 16:31:01] CPU #3: 2097.15 kH, 230.87 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:31:01] Total: 2097.15 kH, 230.87 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:31:01] CPU #2: 2097.15 kH, 228.12 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:31:01] CPU #1: 2097.15 kH, 219.54 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:31:02] CPU #0: 2097.15 kH, 206.06 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:31:06] CPU #0: 824.23 kH, 225.80 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:31:06] CPU #3: 1154.34 kH, 229.71 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:31:06] Total: 6172.87 kH, 903.17 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:31:06] CPU #2: 1140.60 kH, 226.97 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:31:06] CPU #1: 1097.69 kH, 226.17 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:31:11] CPU #0: 1129.01 kH, 221.69 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:31:11] CPU #3: 1148.54 kH, 231.20 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:31:11] Total: 4515.84 kH, 906.03 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:31:11] CPU #2: 1134.87 kH, 229.17 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:31:11] CPU #1: 1130.86 kH, 220.70 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:31:13] CTRL_C_EVENT received, exiting
This shows that the AVX2 optimized version is 25.83% faster than AVX-only version in the same architecture. Ryzen is said it only have AVX2 emulation, not real 256 bits, so it will be interesting to see the results there. Doing the same tests, this time with the "sha256t" algo, I got these results. AVX-only version: CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-4200U CPU @ 1.60GHz
CPU features: SSE2 AES AVX AVX2
SW built on Mar 31 2017 with GCC 4.8.3
SW features: SSE2 AES AVX
Algo features: SSE2 SHA
Start mining with SSE2
[2017-04-04 16:35:52] 4 miner threads started, using 'sha256t' algorithm.
[2017-04-04 16:35:53] CPU #1: 262.14 kH, 321.25 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:35:53] CPU #2: 262.14 kH, 321.25 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:35:53] CPU #3: 262.14 kH, 321.25 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:35:53] Total: 786.43 kH, 963.75 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:35:53] CPU #0: 262.14 kH, 293.18 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:35:57] CPU #0: 1172.72 kH, 297.42 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:35:57] CPU #2: 1284.99 kH, 315.88 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:35:57] CPU #3: 1284.99 kH, 315.88 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:35:57] Total: 4004.85 kH, 1250.43 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:35:57] CPU #1: 1284.99 kH, 313.47 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:02] CPU #3: 1579.41 kH, 316.94 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:02] Total: 5322.12 kH, 1243.72 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:02] CPU #0: 1487.11 kH, 294.72 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:02] CPU #2: 1579.41 kH, 312.05 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:02] CPU #1: 1567.37 kH, 305.89 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:06] CPU #0: 1473.59 kH, 303.84 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:07] CPU #2: 1560.23 kH, 314.61 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:07] CPU #3: 1584.69 kH, 313.62 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:07] Total: 6185.88 kH, 1237.96 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:07] CPU #1: 1529.45 kH, 301.75 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:07] CTRL_C_EVENT received, exiting
And now the AVX2-optimized version: CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-4200U CPU @ 1.60GHz
CPU features: SSE2 AES AVX AVX2
SW built on Mar 31 2017 with GCC 4.8.3
SW features: SSE2 AES AVX AVX2
Algo features: SSE2 SHA
Start mining with SSE2
[2017-04-04 16:36:14] 4 miner threads started, using 'sha256t' algorithm.
[2017-04-04 16:36:15] CPU #2: 262.14 kH, 430.18 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:15] CPU #1: 262.14 kH, 419.43 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:15] CPU #0: 262.14 kH, 409.20 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:15] CPU #3: 262.14 kH, 399.46 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:15] Total: 1048.58 kH, 1658.27 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:19] CPU #3: 1597.83 kH, 422.56 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:19] Total: 2384.26 kH, 1681.37 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:19] CPU #1: 1677.72 kH, 416.17 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:19] CPU #0: 1636.80 kH, 404.45 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:19] CPU #2: 1720.74 kH, 417.14 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:24] CPU #3: 2112.80 kH, 420.91 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:24] Total: 7148.05 kH, 1658.68 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:24] CPU #0: 2022.27 kH, 409.25 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:24] CPU #2: 2085.72 kH, 419.44 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:24] CPU #1: 2080.86 kH, 409.45 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:29] CPU #3: 2104.57 kH, 422.75 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:29] Total: 8293.42 kH, 1660.89 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:29] CPU #0: 2046.24 kH, 414.94 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:29] CPU #2: 2097.18 kH, 417.33 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:29] CPU #1: 2047.27 kH, 406.14 kH/s
[2017-04-04 16:36:29] CTRL_C_EVENT received, exiting
This time I went from 1245 kH/s to 1660 kH/s, a surprising 33.33% increase on speed! With this algorithm, I really will like to see the performance with native HW SHA acceleration |
|
|
|
Hey
At first I'd like to thank You for doing great job, keep up the good work.
I'm currently testing monero mining on FX8320 clocked at 4,1 GHz.
With newest cpuminer-aes-avx.exe i've got better hashrate that with cpuminer-multi.
On 8 threads it goes to 312 H/s on iddle (Win7).
And with only 4 threads tweaked in task manager to use only cores 0, 2, 4 and 6 i got this:
[2017-04-03 18:29:17] CPU #2: 863 H, 58.18 H/s
[2017-04-03 18:29:17] CPU #0: 839 H, 57.07 H/s
[2017-04-03 18:29:17] CPU #1: 844 H, 58.12 H/s
[2017-04-03 18:29:17] CPU #3: 905 H, 60.01 H/s
[2017-04-03 18:29:56] Accepted 38/38 (100%), 4898 H, 232.88 H/s - opened browser with 30+ tabs.
On iddle its going to 248 H/s
I wasn't connecting any power meter but i guess there will be much less power draw on 4 cores.
And here i've got a question about "--cpu-affinity", I don't know how to use it with "--threads 4", so it would direct all work to cores 0, 2, 4, 6 like I'm doing this in Task Manager, but only after launching the .exe
The are some hex parameters which I don't understand like 0xF0F0 or 0x30, I tried use them without effect.
Can You give me some advice ?
I can give you that advice. The --cpu-affinity works as a bit mask. The least significant bit is the core 0, the next one is core 1 and so on. Imagine the cores like: 0 -- 1 -- 2 -- 3 -- 4 -- 5 -- 6 -- 7 (extended to 7 to fill a BYTE, 8 bits) Now the bits for each core are: 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 This binary value now is encoded with 8th core first, so it becomes => 01010101. Converting it to hex values (grouping in fours and converting) becomes => 0101 0101 => 0x55 So you must use --cpu-affinity 0x55 in your case. |
|
|
|
If still looking aroung, I offer myself! Zero experience on coins, but good programmer overall with skills in many programming languages. PM me for references |
|
|
|
I see people reserving translations and such so ... can I reserve Spanish language translation? I know so many friends of mine that are into the Fantasy Sports that will be delighted to take part in your game |
|
|
|
Veo que la traducción a español aún no está reservada así que ...¡Me la pido! |
|
|
|
Dear Dev,
I tried to use cpuminer to mine xmr with my computer.
It shows:
[2017-03-23 13:23:08] Starting Stratum on stratum+tcp://xmr.crypto-pool.fr:3333
[2017-03-23 13:23:08] 24 miner threads started, using 'cryptonight' algorithm.
[2017-03-23 13:23:09] API bind to port 4048 failed - trying again in 20sec
[2017-03-23 13:23:11] Stratum difficulty set to 18000
[2017-03-23 13:23:15] CPU #6: 66 H, 18.39 H/s
Is it ok for API failed?
In my experience, is no problem if you don't want or need to control the miner remotely through the provided API interface. In your case, it seems you are mining with another instance of this same miner, or the original version, and you need to specify a new port for this instance. Use: --api-bind <other_port_number>
in your argument list and the problem will be solved. |
|
|
|
Glad to help you earn money and keep your CPU cool  Now spread the word!  |
|
|
|
Guys , anyone know a best pool for mining monero ? i want try with i7 5820k @ 4 ghz , and i5 6600 , im waiting ryzen 1700 .
Anyone ? . Personally, I use nicehash, which mines XMR direct to your BTC account, and this cpuminer-opt client. This is what you need to use: cpuminer-aes-avx2.exe -a cryptonight -o stratum+tcp://cryptonight.eu.nicehash.com:3355 -u <btc-wallet> -p x
Other interesting pool is MoneroPool: cpuminer-aes-avx2.exe -a cryptonight -o stratum+tcp://monerol.com:3333 -u <monero-wallet>.<difficulty> -p x
If you will use Ryzen, read my guide to maximize profits with Monero in Ryzen some comments above. Why you convert on btc ? i want keep xmr . What is the guide for ryzen ? . As you can see, I also showed you how to mine XMR directly into your wallet using a pool. Regarding the "Ryzen guide", this is the relevant message link on this thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1326803.msg18239788#msg18239788 |
|
|
|
How much for Spanish translation? |
|
|
|
Guys , anyone know a best pool for mining monero ? i want try with i7 5820k @ 4 ghz , and i5 6600 , im waiting ryzen 1700 .
Anyone ? . Personally, I use nicehash, which mines XMR direct to your BTC account, and this cpuminer-opt client. This is what you need to use: cpuminer-aes-avx2.exe -a cryptonight -o stratum+tcp://cryptonight.eu.nicehash.com:3355 -u <btc-wallet> -p x
Other interesting pool is MoneroPool: cpuminer-aes-avx2.exe -a cryptonight -o stratum+tcp://monerol.com:3333 -u <monero-wallet>.<difficulty> -p x
If you will use Ryzen, read my guide to maximize profits with Monero in Ryzen some comments above. |
|
|
|
After thinking on what I've done, I can safely say that this is a viable Monero mining strategy for Ryzen 7 family of processors (8 cores / 16 threads, divided up into two CCXs of 4 cores / 8 threads each, and 8MB L3 cache each):
I think Ryzen 5 will be an excellent architecture for mining cryptonight due to it's L3 cache size and low price. The extra cores of the R7 aren't needed for cryptonight. The more compute bound algos may do better with R7, but they also do better with GPU. You are right. They can be entirely devoted to cryptonight and leave some free cores for other tasks at a reasonable price. The R.O.I. can be interesting to calculate once we have the first units to test. These will be the setups in this case: - Ryzen 5 1400 will have 2 + 2 cores and 8 threads with 8MB L3 cache in total (4MB per CCX). This will allow to use "Monero1.bat" with "--cpu-affinity 0x03 -t 2" and "Monero2.bat" with "--cpu-affinity 0x30 -t 2". 4 threads are free to use in other tasks.
- Ryzen 5 1500X will have the same core and thread count as above, but with 16MB L3 cache, so it will use the "Monero1.bat" with "--cpu-affinity 0x0F -t 4" and "Monero2.bat" with "--cpu-affinity 0xF0 -t 4". The whole CPU will be mining Cryptonight.
- Ryzen 5 1600 will have 3 + 3 cores and 12 threads with 16MB L3 cache. They must use "Monero1.bat" with "--cpu-affinity 0x00F -t 4" and "Monero2.bat" with "--cpu-affinity 0xF00 -t 4" and still have 4 free threads to use elsewhere. This applies too to Ryzen 5 1600X CPU.
|
|
|
|
Sorry! I had not analyzed the full source for your miner  What I have been doing for some time is testing the capabilities and limits of the miner. I have a simple laptop for my experiments. This is information from your miner: - CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-4200U CPU @ 1.60GHz
- CPU features: SSE2 AES AVX AVX2
This CPU has only 3MB Level 3 cache, 2 cores and 2 threads per core (4 logical CPUs), so I have tried to maximize my mining capabilities under Windows 8.1. First, I mined XMR using 4 threads for a total of 55 to 60 H/s. After cheking the cache, I got the same value with only 2 threads. Finally, I have settled on using 1 thread at 25 H/s and the other 3 threads for mining Lyra2re2 at a combined total of 250-300 kH/s. After thinking on what I've done, I can safely say that this is a viable Monero mining strategy for Ryzen 7 family of processors (8 cores / 16 threads, divided up into two CCXs of 4 cores / 8 threads each, and 8MB L3 cache each): ** Monero1.bat REM ** USE THE FIRST CCX MAXIMIZING L3-CACHE
cpuminer-aes-avx2.exe -a cryptonight -t 4 --cpu-affinity 0x000F -o <POOL> -u <USER>-p <PASS>
PAUSE
** Monero2.bat REM ** USE THE SECOND CCX MAXIMIZING L3-CACHE
cpuminer-aes-avx2.exe -a cryptonight -t 4 --cpu-affinity 0x0F00 -o <POOL> -u <USER>-p <PASS>
PAUSE
** OtherCoins.bat REM ** USE THE REMAINING THREADS ON THE TWO CCXs DISREGARDING L3-CACHE
cpuminer-aes-avx2.exe -a <ALGO> -t 8 --cpu-affinity 0xF0F0 -o <POOL> -u <USER>-p <PASS>
PAUSE
** MineAll.bat REM ** LAUNCH ALL MINERS AT ONCE
START Monero1.bat
START Monero2.bat
START OtherCoins.bat
PAUSE
Alternatively, you can use only 6 threads on the third file so you can use the remaining two threads to browse the web or do other tasks while mining in the background. |
|
|
|
This is the code for sending RPC commands to Monero and similar miners. It's written in C++, with classes and overloaded operators, but can be converted to standard C if needed: UniValue CallRPC(const string& strMethod, const UniValue& params)
{
std::string host = GetArg("-rpcconnect", DEFAULT_RPCCONNECT);
int port = GetArg("-rpcport", BaseParams().RPCPort());
// Create event base
struct event_base *base = event_base_new(); // TODO RAII
if (!base)
throw runtime_error("cannot create event_base");
// Synchronously look up hostname
struct evhttp_connection *evcon = evhttp_connection_base_new(base, NULL, host.c_str(), port); // TODO RAII
if (evcon == NULL)
throw runtime_error("create connection failed");
evhttp_connection_set_timeout(evcon, GetArg("-rpcclienttimeout", DEFAULT_HTTP_CLIENT_TIMEOUT));
HTTPReply response;
struct evhttp_request *req = evhttp_request_new(http_request_done, (void*)&response); // TODO RAII
if (req == NULL)
throw runtime_error("create http request failed");
// Get credentials
std::string strRPCUserColonPass;
if (mapArgs["-rpcpassword"] == "") {
// Try fall back to cookie-based authentication if no password is provided
if (!GetAuthCookie(&strRPCUserColonPass)) {
throw runtime_error(strprintf(
_("Could not locate RPC credentials. No authentication cookie could be found, and no rpcpassword is set in the configuration file (%s)"),
GetConfigFile().string().c_str()));
}
} else {
strRPCUserColonPass = mapArgs["-rpcuser"] + ":" + mapArgs["-rpcpassword"];
}
struct evkeyvalq *output_headers = evhttp_request_get_output_headers(req);
assert(output_headers);
evhttp_add_header(output_headers, "Host", host.c_str());
evhttp_add_header(output_headers, "Connection", "close");
evhttp_add_header(output_headers, "Authorization", (std::string("Basic ") + EncodeBase64(strRPCUserColonPass)).c_str());
// Attach request data
std::string strRequest = JSONRPCRequest(strMethod, params, 1);
struct evbuffer * output_buffer = evhttp_request_get_output_buffer(req);
assert(output_buffer);
evbuffer_add(output_buffer, strRequest.data(), strRequest.size());
int r = evhttp_make_request(evcon, req, EVHTTP_REQ_POST, "/");
if (r != 0) {
evhttp_connection_free(evcon);
event_base_free(base);
throw CConnectionFailed("send http request failed");
}
event_base_dispatch(base);
evhttp_connection_free(evcon);
event_base_free(base);
if (response.status == 0)
throw CConnectionFailed("couldn't connect to server");
else if (response.status == HTTP_UNAUTHORIZED)
throw runtime_error("incorrect rpcuser or rpcpassword (authorization failed)");
else if (response.status >= 400 && response.status != HTTP_BAD_REQUEST && response.status != HTTP_NOT_FOUND && response.status != HTTP_INTERNAL_SERVER_ERROR)
throw runtime_error(strprintf("server returned HTTP error %d", response.status));
else if (response.body.empty())
throw runtime_error("no response from server");
// Parse reply
UniValue valReply(UniValue::VSTR);
if (!valReply.read(response.body))
throw runtime_error("couldn't parse reply from server");
const UniValue& reply = valReply.get_obj();
if (reply.empty())
throw runtime_error("expected reply to have result, error and id properties");
return reply;
}
What one needs to do is thus adding this new communications protocol to the miner and adjust it accordingly. This way the miner can solo mine this and similar coins without problem. |
|
|
|
Win bin.
Found a "bug"
Wrong user / pass leads to an error about code
Else it seems fine!
I have no idea what that means. JSON decode failed(1): '[' or '{' expected near '<' when wrong user/pass This means that the wallet returned an HTML/XML response and the miner expected a JSON encoded response. Same thing happens if you try to mine coins where their wallets doesn't support or use getwork protocol. MachineCoin is one example, as I already PM'ed to op |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
