OFFICIAL CGMINER mining software thread for linux/win/osx/mips/arm/r-pi 4.11.1

[optimator]

Thanks for all the hard work on 2.8.7, it rocks!

It seems there is small anomaly with the .config file. If I have multiple pools in the config file AND I'm using the stratum+tcp:// uri AND the stratum+tcp:// pool is not the first line in the config file, then the stratum+tcp:// pool is reported as dead.

If works fine if you are using stratum with http and letting cgminer redirect to the stratum uri - just not if you explicitly call out stratum+tcp.

[1713576152]

1713576152

[1713576152]

1713576152

[1713576152]

1713576152

[1713576152]

1713576152

[1713576152]

1713576152

[ralree]

Sorry if this has already been addressed, but will cgminer support namecoin merged mining with GBT/stratum pools?  Will a local namecoind instance be required for this since work is checked locally for GBT?  Thanks!

[Joshwaa]

Smooth sailing on the new release 2.8.7, 79xx and 58xx rigs are all happy! Thanks Con!

[amigaman]

Sorry if this has already been addressed, but will cgminer support namecoin merged mining with GBT/stratum pools?  Will a local namecoind instance be required for this since work is checked locally for GBT?  Thanks!

As far as the pool supports it, yes, and without local nmcd.
For example, BTCGuild is Stratum and Merged NMC/BTC, so i am going for 2.8.7 after the positive reports here.
Slush0's Proxy stopped working for me, so my 2.7.6 miners have switched to another pool instead, because stratum was buggy under win7.

[ralree]

Sorry if this has already been addressed, but will cgminer support namecoin merged mining with GBT/stratum pools?  Will a local namecoind instance be required for this since work is checked locally for GBT?  Thanks!

As far as the pool supports it, yes, and without local nmcd.
For example, BTCGuild is Stratum and Merged NMC/BTC, so i am going for 2.8.7 after the positive reports here.
Slush0's Proxy stopped working for me, so my 2.7.6 miners have switched to another pool instead, because stratum was buggy under win7.

Thanks - there's some thoughts in the Slush thread near the end that merged mining will die with GBT/Stratum, but DrHaribo of Bitminter says there's no issue.

14:43 <+DrHaribo> both GBT and Stratum allow you to change the generation transaction
14:43 <+DrHaribo> but the server can tell you to include the merged mining data
14:43 < hardwarehank> ok glad you have a handle on it
14:43 <+DrHaribo> so there is no problem
14:44 <+DrHaribo> but I agree with Slush that the namecoin project seems dead

[dooferorg]

Can anyone tell me if they are running Linux what combination of Catalyst and SDK they are using?

I cleaned everything off and am using Catalyst 12.8.

When I install SDK 2.5 and compile against it, cgminer (2.7.7, 2.8.5 and 2.8.7) all segfault on startup (also trying to see how to leave the debug symbols intact for gdb so I can be of more help).

If I install the SDK 2.5 manually (so as not to overwrite the OpenCL and the amdocl64 library (I am using 64 bit Debian Squeeze) then cgminer says 'You have SDK 2.6.+ which performs poorly with this kernel (phatk)'. Does everyone use the diablo these days?

Still only getting the one card noticed by cgminer.. any help with that would be much appreciated.

[Lem]

Can anyone tell me if they are running Linux what combination of Catalyst and SDK they are using?

Since April I've been running driver 12.3 on top of SDK 2.6 (both manually installed). Ubuntu 11.10 64bit, AMD 7970.
Cgminer uses poclbm kernel, of course.

[Krak]

Can anyone tell me if they are running Linux what combination of Catalyst and SDK they are using?

I use Catalyst 11.12 and SDK 2.5 on Ubuntu 12.04 (phatk kernel). It took me a long time to figure out how to install both of them properly. Unless you're using 7000 series cards, I'd recommend this combo.

[-ck]

Con, can you tell us anything about the progress with BFL ASIC support?  Please choose one of the following:

1.  I can't talk about it, I'm under NDA.
2.  I've logged in remotely to their servers and have poked around a little.
3.  I've logged in remotely and have already begun creating code for BFL's ASIC to work with cgminer.
4.  I have no plans to log in remotely to BFL and won't do anything until they send me some real hardware.
5.  I have real hardware in hand and am working on the code.
6.  I won't support BFL ASIC because I won't develop for them for free and they haven't paid me yet.

No NDA, no physical hardware, no remote access, not even a protocol document to work from. Nothing has been done yet. Will start once I at least get protocol docs.

[abracadabra]

Con, can you tell us anything about the progress with BFL ASIC support?  Please choose one of the following:

1.  I can't talk about it, I'm under NDA.
2.  I've logged in remotely to their servers and have poked around a little.
3.  I've logged in remotely and have already begun creating code for BFL's ASIC to work with cgminer.
4.  I have no plans to log in remotely to BFL and won't do anything until they send me some real hardware.
5.  I have real hardware in hand and am working on the code.
6.  I won't support BFL ASIC because I won't develop for them for free and they haven't paid me yet.

No NDA, no physical hardware, no remote access, not even a protocol document to work from. Nothing has been done yet. Will start once I at least get protocol docs.

Sometime next year I'm thinking

[kano]

Con, can you tell us anything about the progress with BFL ASIC support?  Please choose one of the following:

1.  I can't talk about it, I'm under NDA.
2.  I've logged in remotely to their servers and have poked around a little.
3.  I've logged in remotely and have already begun creating code for BFL's ASIC to work with cgminer.
4.  I have no plans to log in remotely to BFL and won't do anything until they send me some real hardware.
5.  I have real hardware in hand and am working on the code.
6.  I won't support BFL ASIC because I won't develop for them for free and they haven't paid me yet.

For me there is some of: 1.

However, to clarify, BFL have already said they will be sending hardware.
My 'discussion' in one of the BFL threads resolved the whole issue/questions about only providing remote access.

As long as BFL and bASIC send out the dev hardware, support for them will be in cgminer
and they have both said they will be sending dev hardware, publicly, on the forum.

It's now simply am issue of 'time' (when the information and hardware is available)

[kano]

I think commit 8bd8696854 got the bug I was having. No segfaults in nearly 4 days now
Well spotted!

Just a Linux 'overlay' I wrote that I put on cgminer (memory.h) to directly tell me what memory wasn't being freed
(and it does a lot of other memory checking also)
I'm always paranoid about my code and memory problems, so I've spent quite some effort on it.
My latest (final) version now works very well and is simple for me to enable
(and add only a few lines needed to api.c to do manual status checks)
It uses a LOT more memory, so memory leaks will also show up a lot faster.

[poon-TANG]

Con, can you tell us anything about the progress with BFL ASIC support?  Please choose one of the following:

1.  I can't talk about it, I'm under NDA.
2.  I've logged in remotely to their servers and have poked around a little.
3.  I've logged in remotely and have already begun creating code for BFL's ASIC to work with cgminer.
4.  I have no plans to log in remotely to BFL and won't do anything until they send me some real hardware.
5.  I have real hardware in hand and am working on the code.
6.  I won't support BFL ASIC because I won't develop for them for free and they haven't paid me yet.

No NDA, no physical hardware, no remote access, not even a protocol document to work from. Nothing has been done yet. Will start once I at least get protocol docs.

Sometime next year I'm thinking

+1 ..thinking the same thing

[-ck]

Con, can you tell us anything about the progress with BFL ASIC support? 

No NDA, no physical hardware, no remote access, not even a protocol document to work from. Nothing has been done yet. Will start once I at least get protocol docs.

Oh and I  realised it was implicit but not explicit in my response, but just since everyone is clinging to any news, I also have not been given any indication of the timeframe for arrival of any of the above.

[dooferorg]

Can anyone tell me if they are running Linux what combination of Catalyst and SDK they are using?

I use Catalyst 11.12 and SDK 2.5 on Ubuntu 12.04 (phatk kernel). It took me a long time to figure out how to install both of them properly. Unless you're using 7000 series cards, I'd recommend this combo.

You sir, are 'da man'. Cleaned everything up and installed those versions (Catalyst 11.12 and SDK 2.5) and then recompiled cgminer (2.8.7). Fired up (no segfaults) AND both GPUs were enabled. Trucking along at over 800Mh using phatk. Room for tweaking but that's so very awesome, thank you so much - Sent .25 BTC your way for 'thanks'

[Krak]

You sir, are 'da man'. Cleaned everything up and installed those versions (Catalyst 11.12 and SDK 2.5) and then recompiled cgminer (2.8.7). Fired up (no segfaults) AND both GPUs were enabled. Trucking along at over 800Mh using phatk. Room for tweaking but that's so very awesome, thank you so much - Sent .25 BTC your way for 'thanks'

Thanks, glad to hear it worked out. I know I was having a terrible time trying to get 2.5 installed with 12.1+ because they install their own SDK (the cause of the segfaults).

[monstrs]

Maybe someone can help?

In my 4x5870 rig i have a problem recently.

One of the cards stops working and cgminer says invalid node: hw error
Is that card dead? After lowering and taking back clocks on that card it can work again.

Thanks if anyone can help.

[dooferorg]

Maybe someone can help?

In my 4x5870 rig i have a problem recently.

One of the cards stops working and cgminer says invalid node: hw error
Is that card dead? After lowering and taking back clocks on that card it can work again.

Thanks if anyone can help.

If it 'can work again', then it's not dead  .. wouldn't you say? If it can no longer clock as high, maybe there's a heat issue (heatsinks can detach slightly and/or thermal paste is not as effective over time)

[monstrs]

Maybe someone can help?

In my 4x5870 rig i have a problem recently.

One of the cards stops working and cgminer says invalid node: hw error
Is that card dead? After lowering and taking back clocks on that card it can work again.

Thanks if anyone can help.

If it 'can work again', then it's not dead  .. wouldn't you say? If it can no longer clock as high, maybe there's a heat issue (heatsinks can detach slightly and/or thermal paste is not as effective over time)

Its temps is very good ~ 60-70 all the time, maybe its PSU fault?

[amigaman]

Maybe.
Capacitors age, that makes the voltages wobble a little bit more.
Then, Silicon migrates over time with temperature and that may shift the tolerances down.
And, last but not least, your sensor readings may not show what really happens there, because there are more points of heat than just the one shown.

Don't forget, your system uses a lot of power and generates a lot of heat 24/7, while almost all components are designed for a max. of 8h/day and 20 days/month, just to live past warranty period (in average that is).
So your hardware will live it's average live in ~6 months, but as you do not only have one unit, you will see the variance in that.
Some units will die after a few months or even weeks, some will work 'forever'.
I personally had made the same experience with 4 6950s, the longest living individual did almost 6 times of the shortest time.
Also, mine had 2 fans each, 1 has 2 blocked fans, 2 have one (both the same), the last has 2 working fans, but the chip gave up and produces blocks on the desktop (no mining!).
I have modified the remaining 3 cards, removed the fans and plugged a 12cm one in, now they continue to work for almost 3 months now.
I got them killed in 4 beforehand.
But i slowly replace them with 2 7970 in my rigs. 340Mh @ 200W -> 1300Mh @ 500W at the outlet is a good deal.
also, no cost for hardware (borrowed).