Bitcoin Forum
September 19, 2019, 01:48:55 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 [301] 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 ... 814 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool  (Read 2584179 times)
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2912
Merit: 1193


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
July 08, 2013, 11:07:50 AM
 #6001

so before we can expect to see any better behavior with ASICS we need to wait until 95% of the pool has upgraded, correct?
However, the BFL 1.2.5 firmware makes the Jalapeno worse and all the rest of BFLSC the same.
If the chips are doing 4GH/s it takes ~0.93s to do a nonce range (and they are not divided up across the chips)
So expect around 3.1% work loss (when p2pool goes to 30s) just due to the way the BFLSC firmware works.
As I've stated long ago on the BFL forum, the fix for p2pool is quite straight forward, but still no response about it being done.
https://forums.butterflylabs.com/announcements/913-bitforce-sc-communication-protocol-draft-revision-2-a-8.html#post31853

If we hack
https://github.com/luke-jr/BitForce_SC/blob/e9e6a41fd76050a3aea2ab973c808f4cede174eb/BitForce_SC/ASIC_Engine.c
in function
ASIC_calculate_engines_nonce_range()

and divide line 1761 by some factor
https://github.com/luke-jr/BitForce_SC/blob/e9e6a41fd76050a3aea2ab973c808f4cede174eb/BitForce_SC/ASIC_Engine.c#L1761

we should reduce the nonce range by that factor.

This is a myopic hack, but would it work? you know the code intimately, i'm just pulling at straws here.
I just look at the original of 1.2.5 from Nasser, but yeah with a few minor changes in there you could make it hash a fraction of a nonce range every time instead of the full range.

The only (minor) catch is that of course you are sending n times the amount of work and generating n times the amount of work in cgminer.
It becomes a major catch if you are dividing it too much.
You'd also have to change my FULLNONCE definition in driver-bflsc.c (around line 77)

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLU
Discord support invite at https://kano.is/ Majority developer of the ckpool code
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!
1568900935
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1568900935

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1568900935
Reply with quote  #2

1568900935
Report to moderator
1568900935
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1568900935

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1568900935
Reply with quote  #2

1568900935
Report to moderator
1568900935
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1568900935

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1568900935
Reply with quote  #2

1568900935
Report to moderator
PLAY NOW
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1568900935
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1568900935

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1568900935
Reply with quote  #2

1568900935
Report to moderator
1568900935
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1568900935

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1568900935
Reply with quote  #2

1568900935
Report to moderator
baloo_kiev
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476
Merit: 250


View Profile
July 08, 2013, 12:16:10 PM
 #6002

node: lenny.dnsd.me:9332
I setup BE Blade to use +1 pseudoshare (+1 to username). However, I am still getting these errors, but not so often as before.
Log below:
There's also someone mining on my node right now on BE Blade (12.6GH/s hashrate, 7.6GH/s of it - DOA). Looks like he setup +1 to username as well.

I cannot prevent other users to connect to my node and start mining with BE Blades. If they will not setup +1 to username, my p2pool log will be spammed with thousands of error messages. How to fix it in p2pool code?

50% DOA is just what is expected and it will probably drop to about 18% after share period switch.

Blades send diff1 shares regardles of what the node tells, so if the difficulty is set higher, a part of pseudoshares will be reported 'hash > target'. Those rare cases reported when you set diff to 1 are just hardware errors which are not filtered by the blade's software (my AM USB's chip produces about 1% or less HW errors depending on temperature).

Any code tweaks most likely won't decrease your node load. If you want to get rid of these messages in your log, just comment out lines 413 to 415 in p2pool/work.py.

PGP: 6EC48BA7
Welcome to my p2pool: BTC
maqifrnswa
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 454
Merit: 250


View Profile
July 08, 2013, 12:34:57 PM
 #6003

I just look at the original of 1.2.5 from Nasser, but yeah with a few minor changes in there you could make it hash a fraction of a nonce range every time instead of the full range.

The only (minor) catch is that of course you are sending n times the amount of work and generating n times the amount of work in cgminer.
It becomes a major catch if you are dividing it too much.
You'd also have to change my FULLNONCE definition in driver-bflsc.c (around line 77)

great summary by Kano on BFL forums, https://forums.butterflylabs.com/announcements/3282-bitforce-sc-firmware-version-1-2-5-a-5.html#post46125

Quote from: kano
I job per chip is worse, not better (for p2pool) Tongue However if it runs 50% faster, well I guess that doesn't matter

Anyway,
the biggest issue with the MCU design in the FPGA was that it doesn't give you an answer until it completes the work.
The SC does the same thing.

So e.g. with 10 chips doing 4GH/s each, instead of getting 1 answer in 0.093 seconds, you get 10 answers in 0.93 seconds.
Thus latency is worse with the 1 job per chip firmware.

As I have said elsewhere (since 20-Jun), the simple fix is grade school maths level:
Divide the job up based on the speed of each chip, not give each chip it's own job, faster chips get a larger nonce range, slower chips get a smaller range.
Basically, set it so that all chips complete about the same time based on their performance.
The total number range is 4,294,967,296 so it's not hard to divide it up and get a very close finishing time for each chip
(and you can determine the ranges once and use them until it readjusts the chip performance)

With 1.2.5 on 10s p2pool, you'll still get roughly 9.3% stale on all BFLSCs - each chip will be doing work when an LP hits and the MCU will wait for each chip to complete it's job before it starts a new one and have a stale result from each - being 9.3% of the 10s share LP time (or 3.1% of the soon to be increased 30s LP)
Anonymailer
aka BitBacco
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 662
Merit: 500



View Profile WWW
July 08, 2013, 01:57:39 PM
 #6004

Considering BFL have been too lazy to make P2Pool a consideration, they really should throw some of that BTC1000 donation fund they setup towards forrestv, cg and bfgminer teams for doing this work for them.

MacMiner - The first, best and easiest to use native Mac coin mining app: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=197110.0

BTC: 12vZf8mjaXvHorXWVWfv7nZspHa8L8kfoG LTC: LLRqwo3YcLqoRyfZRVmUevtd2Y35Vvnt4w
baloo_kiev
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476
Merit: 250


View Profile
July 08, 2013, 02:15:00 PM
 #6005

Considering BFL have been too lazy to make P2Pool a consideration, they really should throw some of that BTC1000 donation fund they setup towards forrestv, cg and bfgminer teams for doing this work for them.

They just don't care. Josh doesn't even know what is p2pool. This perfectly fits his "money printing" conception. They should start shipping standalone miners with pre-set standard config: main pool Guild, backup pool 50BTC, option to set your MtGox and bank account, so after quick configuration you just power it up and receive USD straight to your account, and forget about bitcoins Grin

PGP: 6EC48BA7
Welcome to my p2pool: BTC
Searinox
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 140
Merit: 100


Do you like fire? I'm full of it.


View Profile
July 08, 2013, 04:20:47 PM
Last edit: July 08, 2013, 04:54:25 PM by Searinox
 #6006

The new P2Pool is frequently freezing up and using 50% CPU for a minute at a time.

Update: Restarting them along with the node after the initial share download fixes it. I've repro'd this issue on 2 machines.

forrestv
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 516
Merit: 514


View Profile
July 08, 2013, 05:11:47 PM
 #6007

P2Pool release 13.1  - commit hash: 94b87f6c9c04c292bca9565961f83198438f0f76

Windows binary: http://u.forre.st/u/xmqipwes/p2pool_win32_13.1.zip
Windows binary signature: http://u.forre.st/u/apxlhewu/p2pool_win32_13.1.zip.sig
Source zipball: https://github.com/forrestv/p2pool/zipball/13.1
Source tarball: https://github.com/forrestv/p2pool/tarball/13.1

Changes:
The hardfork hasn't happened yet, and this release fixes a potential problem that could cause people mining with non-standard transaction inclusion options to have their shares orphaned more often.

1J1zegkNSbwX4smvTdoHSanUfwvXFeuV23
maqifrnswa
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 454
Merit: 250


View Profile
July 08, 2013, 05:19:21 PM
Last edit: July 09, 2013, 05:58:43 AM by maqifrnswa
 #6008

Hey Kano,

Check this out:
https://github.com/luke-jr/BitForce_SC/blob/e9e6a41fd76050a3aea2ab973c808f4cede174eb/BitForce_SC/HostInteractionProtocols.h#L42

ZPX (custom nonce range) and p2pool is programed into the firmware, it's just not hooked up (missing below):
https://github.com/luke-jr/BitForce_SC/blob/master/BitForce_SC/Main_BitforceSC.c#L424

and here's the callback:
https://github.com/luke-jr/BitForce_SC/blob/e9e6a41fd76050a3aea2ab973c808f4cede174eb/BitForce_SC/HostInteractionProtocols.c#L2320

notice:
Code:
ASIC_job_issue(p_job,
p_job->nonce_begin,
p_job->nonce_end,
FALSE, 0, FALSE);

also the comment in Main-BitforceSC.c
Code:
/* BUG FIX LOG
* ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* July 3rd 2012 - Fixed the P2P JOB problem (range_end - range_begin, which was inverse)
* June 2nd 2012 - Realized the system must run a 16MHz to ensure compatibility with flash SPI
*
*/

it looks like it was in and working but removed...
initial code had lots of p2pool support
https://github.com/luke-jr/BitForce_SC/blob/f569b10e05ff468e823b2e44573cd9cdda6b6850/BitForce_SC/Main_BitforceSC.c

EDIT:
And here is the commit p2pool was removed from the firmware
https://github.com/luke-jr/BitForce_SC/commit/73590d015c614c8b40bf8a8fe25de7169c347c53

EDIT2:
ZPX doesn't seem to help too much either since it's independent of queue
https://forums.butterflylabs.com/announcements/913-bitforce-sc-communication-protocol-draft-revision-2-a-10.html#post37469
looks like i'm going back to finding a way to hardcode in a reduced nonce range to the SCs...
yxxyun
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 100
Merit: 10



View Profile
July 09, 2013, 05:58:46 AM
 #6009

how many percent was updated?  where can we see? can wait for the switch.
daemondazz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 448
Merit: 250



View Profile
July 09, 2013, 06:35:30 AM
 #6010

how many percent was updated?  where can we see? can wait for the switch.

I'd also like to know what percentage of the network has upgraded. Based on http://p2pool-nodes.info/, its 96 nodes are still at < v13.0 and 32 at > v13.0, so around 25%.

Computers, Amateur Radio, Electronics, Aviation - 1dazzrAbMqNu6cUwh2dtYckNygG7jKs8S
bitpop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2534
Merit: 1045


https://keybase.io/bitpop


View Profile WWW
July 09, 2013, 06:43:58 AM
 #6011

You can see in graphs

Reputation  |  PGP  |  Ethereum Classic
Bitcoin: 3DSh6AnmvBpDJFUz2mnLirMLmTMcFs9nDm
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2912
Merit: 1193


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
July 09, 2013, 10:46:19 AM
 #6012

ZPX has always been there, but as I said in my post on the BFL forum:
https://forums.butterflylabs.com/announcements/913-bitforce-sc-communication-protocol-draft-revision-2-a-8.html#post31853
there needs to be a que job version like ZNX with a nonce range but more importantly a que job pack version like ZWX with a nonce range

My comment about ZPX is here:
https://forums.butterflylabs.com/announcements/913-bitforce-sc-communication-protocol-draft-revision-2-a-10.html#post37469

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLU
Discord support invite at https://kano.is/ Majority developer of the ckpool code
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!
Raulnsh
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 22
Merit: 0


View Profile
July 09, 2013, 11:04:39 AM
Last edit: July 09, 2013, 12:19:56 PM by Raulnsh
 #6013

Hi,
Do you have compatible stratum mining proxy as Windows binary? I need it for litecoin mining, but mining_proxy 1.3.0 from guiminer-scrypt is not compatible with p2pool.
Thank you in advance!
forrestv
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 516
Merit: 514


View Profile
July 09, 2013, 01:35:34 PM
 #6014

how many percent was updated?  where can we see? can wait for the switch.

The "desired versions" graph shows this.

1J1zegkNSbwX4smvTdoHSanUfwvXFeuV23
centove
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 194
Merit: 100


View Profile
July 09, 2013, 02:52:26 PM
 #6015

It may not be fast but boy I like this stat:

308MH/s (0.0% DOA)

Efficiency    123.3%

Give me Btc: 1BRkf5bwSVdGCyvu4SyYBiJjEjbNiAQoYd Mine on my node: http://ask.gxsnmp.org:9332/
rav3n_pl
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1359
Merit: 1000


Don`t panic! Organize!


View Profile WWW
July 09, 2013, 03:03:25 PM
 #6016

On 1 good share it is normal.

1Rav3nkMayCijuhzcYemMiPYsvcaiwHni  Bitcoin stuff on my OneDrive
My RPC CoinControl for any coin https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=929954
Some stuff on https://github.com/Rav3nPL/
dc81
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 109
Merit: 100


View Profile
July 09, 2013, 03:41:41 PM
 #6017

how many percent was updated?  where can we see? can wait for the switch.

The "desired versions" graph shows this.

almost 33% on bitcoin and 20% litecoin so far.

Krellan
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 106
Merit: 10


View Profile
July 09, 2013, 05:48:17 PM
 #6018

I upgraded to p2pool 13.1 and it works great!

Question though, when I run it, version is reported as this:

Version: unknown 666f7272657374762d7032706f6f6c2d38333235366538

Is this the correct version?  I installed the p2pool 13.1 snapshot from Github (downloaded the snapshot tarball itself, did not use Git to pull the source).

Thanks!
Josh

1JUZr4TZ5zuB4WdEv4mrhZMaM7yttpJvLG Smiley
notme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1904
Merit: 1001


View Profile
July 09, 2013, 06:37:08 PM
 #6019

Pool rate and the version 11 rate have been dropping with a fairly constant slope, without returning as version 13 rate.  Curious.

https://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
While no idea is perfect, some ideas are useful.
12jh3odyAAaR2XedPKZNCR4X4sebuotQzN
devthedev
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036
Merit: 1000



View Profile
July 09, 2013, 09:54:19 PM
 #6020

Hey everyone, I'm having an error with my P2Pool node. It says. Warning: A MAJORITY OF SHARES CONTAIN A VOTE FOR AN UNSUPPORTED SHARE IMPLEMENTATION! (v13 with 52% support) An upgrade is likely necessary. Check http://p2pool.forre.st/ for more information.

Any ideas what the problem is?

Thanks in advance.

The pool info is located here.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=252455

Pages: « 1 ... 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 [301] 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 ... 814 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!