further improved phatk_dia kernel for Phoenix + SDK 2.6 - 2012-01-13

[indio007]

Vince i editted the code like you said and I got errors.

Diapola what you did works fine. I have 2 5830's testing with now. Expect some Bit.love is all goes well.

[Vince]

Vince i editted the code like you said and I got errors.

Which one of the changes did you try, both?

Tell me about the error you got, just "does not work" helps nobody!

[indio007]

Vince i editted the code like you said and I got errors.

Which one of the changes did you try, both?

Tell me about the error you got, just "does not work" helps nobody!

In Kernel.cl
I changed this:
if(Vals[7].x == -H[7])

to this
if(Vals[7].x == -H[7]-K[60])

and changed this

Vals[7] += K[60] + Vals[3] + P4(124) + P3(124) + P2(124) + P1(124) + s1(124) + ch(124);

to this
Vals[7] + Vals[3] + P4(124) + P3(124) + P2(124) + P1(124) + s1(124) + ch(124);


Then i changed this
Vals[7] = (Vals[3] = (u)0xb956c25b + D1 + s1(4) + ch(4)) + H1;

to this

Vals[7] = (Vals[3] = D1 + s1(4) + ch(4)) + H1;


as instructed here and yes i added the line to init.py

Add

self.state2[3] = np.uint32(self.state2[3] + 0xb956c25b);

to __init__.py, line 77 for me, right behind:

self.calculateF(data)

And remove (u)0xb956c25b from kernel.cl

The error is opencl is having unusual behavior or something. it shows MH etc... just when it seems to want to accept a share it spits that out

[1bitc0inplz]

This most recent update is everything you said it would be!

My 5830 went from 295 MH/s to 305 MH/s with just this update!

Thanks for the great work.

[gominoa]

In Kernel.cl
I changed this:
if(Vals[7].x == -H[7])

to this
if(Vals[7].x == -H[7]-K[60])

Try also changing:
if(Vals[7].y == -H[7])
... to ...
if(Vals[7].y == -H[7]-K[60])

notice Y instead of X. Will be just below the X line

[indio007]

In Kernel.cl
I changed this:
if(Vals[7].x == -H[7])

to this
if(Vals[7].x == -H[7]-K[60])

Try also changing:
if(Vals[7].y == -H[7])
... to ...
if(Vals[7].y == -H[7]-K[60])

notice Y instead of X. Will be just below the X line

Same error

[Diapolo]

Next kernel version will, once more, be faster for 69XX and 58XX cards . Stay tuned!

Dia

[Vince]

Vals[7] += K[60] + Vals[3] + P4(124) + P3(124) + P2(124) + P1(124) + s1(124) + ch(124);

to this
Vals[7] + Vals[3] + P4(124) + P3(124) + P2(124) + P1(124) + s1(124) + ch(124);


is this a typo or did you leave out the "="?

should be:

Vals[7] += Vals[3] + P4(124) + P3(124) + P2(124) + P1(124) + s1(124) + ch(124);

[indio007]

That Worked , i managed to go from 306-308MH to 308-310MH on 5830.
donations forth coming if it remains stable. Thx...

[BOARBEAR]

Vals[7] += K[60] + Vals[3] + P4(124) + P3(124) + P2(124) + P1(124) + s1(124) + ch(124);

to this
Vals[7] + Vals[3] + P4(124) + P3(124) + P2(124) + P1(124) + s1(124) + ch(124);


is this a typo or did you leave out the "="?

should be:

Vals[7] += Vals[3] + P4(124) + P3(124) + P2(124) + P1(124) + s1(124) + ch(124);

do i need to change    if(Vals[7].y == -H[7])?
and    if(Vals[7] == -H[7])?

[BOARBEAR]

Hi Diapolo!

Great to see you're making progress!
There's one thing that pops into my eye:

you already do:
if(Vals[7].x == -H[7])

why not add the K[60] right into it and remove from upper instruction? Saves a whole instruction and will work 100% ;-)

if(Vals[7].x == -H[7]-K[60])


Lets see if I can find more ..

how would this save an instruction? did you just move -K[60]?

[Vince]

how would this save an instruction? did you just move -K[60]?

Yes, just moved it. Now the compiler optimizes it away, before it didn't.

[BOARBEAR]

how would this save an instruction? did you just move -K[60]?

Yes, just moved it. Now the compiler optimizes it away, before it didn't.

Mind explaining more? I don't get it

[Vince]

Mind explaining more? I don't get it

Its a constant.
If I add it together with the other stuff in round 124 to Vals[7], it takes an addition to do so, cause its the only constant.

If moved to the comparison at the end, the two constants H[7] and K[60] are merged together into one by the compiler, same execution time here.

[BOARBEAR]

So i changed the whole thing to

   Vals[7] += Vals[3] + P4(124) + P3(124) + P2(124) + P1(124) + s1(124) + ch(124);
   
#ifdef VECTORS
   if(Vals[7].x == -H[7]-K[60])
      output[OUTPUT_SIZE] = output[(W[3].x >> 2) & OUTPUT_MASK] = W[3].x;
   if(Vals[7].y == -H[7]-K[60])
      output[OUTPUT_SIZE] = output[(W[3].y >> 2) & OUTPUT_MASK] =  W[3].y;
#else
   if(Vals[7] == -H[7]-K[60])
      output[OUTPUT_SIZE] = output[(W[3] >> 2) & OUTPUT_MASK] = W[3];
#endif

does not notice any speed difference, hope that helps

Ps: Does the compiler really do the optimization? If not you introduced one more step cause K[60] appear twice now

[Vince]

I'm pretty sure the compiler will catch this 
Note that the speed increase is minimal, ~0.1-0.2% maybe.

[Diapolo]

Download version 2011-07-11: http://www.mediafire.com/?k404b6lqn8vu6z6

This could be the last version, because there seems no more room for big jumps. I thought I could remove some more additions, but the OpenCL compiler does a better job than I . This version is faster than all previous kernels (uses the least ALU OPs for 69XX and 58XX). Should also work with SDK 2.1. If it throws an error with 2.1, please post here and include the error message!

Thanks to all donators and your feedback!

Dia

[Turix]

Gained about 1 Mhash (431->432) from the 7th version to todays new version on my 5870 (950/315).

[Bobnova]

I also gained about 1Mh/s from todays update compared to the previous update, this is on a 5830 at 875/900 in linux.
The previous update made a big difference over what ships with phoenix 1.50.

I sent a small donation, as you've helped me make more money

[OCedHrt]

Download version 2011-07-11: http://www.mediafire.com/?k404b6lqn8vu6z6

This could be the last version, because there seems no more room for big jumps. I thought I could remove some more additions, but the OpenCL compiler does a better job than I . This version is faster than all previous kernels (uses the least ALU OPs for 69XX and 58XX). Should also work with SDK 2.1. If it throws an error with 2.1, please post here and include the error message!

Thanks to all donators and your feedback!

Dia

Awesome work. Btw, could you explain why Vals[2] = C1; is needed in the beginning when it is reassigned in round 5? I know removing this line breaks the hashing but I'm not seeing why since it isn't used prior to round 5.