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

[DBordello]

Just pulled from git and got ...

 

Code:

./cgminer --auto-gpu --auto-fan --submit-stale --gpu-reorder
[2012-01-30 13:31:10] .: --gpu-reorder: unrecognized option

And still shows 2.2.0 to boot...

Not to insult you, but did you recompile?  I just pulled and I am showing 2.2.1.

[1715359933]

1715359933

[1715359933]

1715359933

[1715359933]

1715359933

[1715359933]

1715359933

[1715359933]

1715359933

[Red Emerald]

Just pulled from git and got ...

 

Code:

./cgminer --auto-gpu --auto-fan --submit-stale --gpu-reorder
[2012-01-30 13:31:10] .: --gpu-reorder: unrecognized option

And still shows 2.2.0 to boot...

Did you forget autogen?

I'm running c0e8819d and it's running fine, although it did take longer than normal to start.

[JWU42]

This is what happens when you try and do things quickly from the office at lunch  

Didn't compile - just did a git pull from p2pool and forgot about building (DUH) the cgminer...

[smurfix]

Hmm. I just fired up a new p2pool job (default settings, pretty much, except for talking to bitcoind of course   ) and then connected cgminer 2.2.1 to it.
Somehow, this doesn't fill me with confidence WRT getting an adequate return from p2pool:

Code:

[2012-01-30 21:08:47] LONGPOLL requested work restart, waiting on fresh work
[2012-01-30 21:08:48] Rejected 00000000.0bfac560.17d1b0c4 GPU 1 thread 3 pool 0
[2012-01-30 21:08:51] Rejected 00000000.8bcfb95f.587deee1 GPU 0 thread 0 pool 0
[2012-01-30 21:08:52] LONGPOLL requested work restart, waiting on fresh work
[2012-01-30 21:08:59] LONGPOLL requested work restart, waiting on fresh work
[2012-01-30 21:09:03] LONGPOLL requested work restart, waiting on fresh work
[2012-01-30 21:09:06] LONGPOLL requested work restart, waiting on fresh work
[2012-01-30 21:09:08] LONGPOLL requested work restart, waiting on fresh work
[2012-01-30 21:09:14] Accepted 00000000.5d6dbc1a.c3b4708e GPU 0 thread 0 pool 0
[2012-01-30 21:09:27] LONGPOLL requested work restart, waiting on fresh work
[2012-01-30 21:09:29] Rejected 00000000.b1fd754a.a40963c3 GPU 0 thread 0 pool 0
[2012-01-30 21:09:31] Rejected 00000000.2af24ce5.0c9d8cca GPU 1 thread 3 pool 0
[2012-01-30 21:09:40] LONGPOLL requested work restart, waiting on fresh work
[2012-01-30 21:09:43] LONGPOLL requested work restart, waiting on fresh work
[2012-01-30 21:10:03] LONGPOLL requested work restart, waiting on fresh work
[2012-01-30 21:10:04] Rejected 00000000.823d886b.03e7ea8a GPU 0 thread 0 pool 0
[2012-01-30 21:10:09] Accepted 00000000.18339988.020e4a54 GPU 1 thread 3 pool 0
[2012-01-30 21:10:13] LONGPOLL requested work restart, waiting on fresh work
[2012-01-30 21:10:17] LONGPOLL requested work restart, waiting on fresh work
[2012-01-30 21:10:33] LONGPOLL requested work restart, waiting on fresh work
[2012-01-30 21:10:38] LONGPOLL requested work restart, waiting on fresh work
[2012-01-30 21:10:48] LONGPOLL requested work restart, waiting on fresh work
[2012-01-30 21:10:56] Accepted 00000000.dadb0773.20b35c1d GPU 1 thread 3 pool 0
[2012-01-30 21:10:56] Accepted 00000000.dded65c8.5fdcc694 GPU 0 thread 0 pool 0
[2012-01-30 21:11:09] Accepted 00000000.7936594f.11a3ce7f GPU 0 thread 0 pool 0
[2012-01-30 21:11:16] Accepted 00000000.80e299be.caf484cb GPU 1 thread 3 pool 0
[2012-01-30 21:11:17] LONGPOLL requested work restart, waiting on fresh work
[2012-01-30 21:11:21] LONGPOLL requested work restart, waiting on fresh work
[2012-01-30 21:11:29] LONGPOLL requested work restart, waiting on fresh work
[2012-01-30 21:11:39] Accepted 00000000.fafd76f3.79ad8cc8 GPU 0 thread 0 pool 0
[2012-01-30 21:11:44] Accepted 00000000.e2283613.344f4379 GPU 1 thread 3 pool 0
[2012-01-30 21:11:47] Accepted 00000000.abee8afd.1be1955c GPU 0 thread 0 pool 0
[2012-01-30 21:11:50] Accepted 00000000.0e06fa8b.b7b2a8ea GPU 1 thread 3 pool 0
[2012-01-30 21:11:57] Accepted 00000000.5931ea9c.ecc3aa6c GPU 0 thread 0 pool 0
[2012-01-30 21:11:59] LONGPOLL requested work restart, waiting on fresh work
[2012-01-30 21:12:03] LONGPOLL requested work restart, waiting on fresh work
[2012-01-30 21:12:06] LONGPOLL requested work restart, waiting on fresh work
[2012-01-30 21:12:11] LONGPOLL requested work restart, waiting on fresh work
[2012-01-30 21:12:12] Rejected 00000000.370dbc90.26abc167 GPU 0 thread 0 pool 0
[2012-01-30 21:12:15] LONGPOLL requested work restart, waiting on fresh work
[2012-01-30 21:12:17] LONGPOLL requested work restart, waiting on fresh work

… esp. since many of those Accepts seem to be from another pool I'm load-balancing to.

[gnar1ta$]

That's normal for p2pool. You get a lot of LP's. My cgminer rejected rate is less than 2% though. If yours is higher there may be an issue. Watch your dead and orphan rate also. They will indicate where any issues are.

[smurfix]

Dead+Orphan are zero. Only 2 shares after an hour at 370 Mhash/sec, with a 40% reject rate, doesn't look too great.
Well … as it seems to work for others here, I'll check over at the p2pool thread.

[zefir]

New version: 2.2.1

So I'm really loathe to leaving a version out there that makes people adopt to massive change that may not have been a good idea, only to have to pull it again in the future. Today I had the luxury of my long-lost mining rig returning so I was finally able to actually do some meaningful debugging and testing of the code I was putting into cgminer and came up with the conclusion: 2.2.0 was a stinker. I spent most of today putting out all the spot fires under my feet and to release something a little more respectable as quickly as possible.
[...]

FYI, the crash I reported is gone with the latest updates. Thanks!

[-ck]

thanks for this release ckolivas - 1 BTC Donation Sent!

can you explain more about what the problem was with the gpu reordering by default?

you said "The whole GPU-reorder  saga caused massive damage"

which is a vague and frightening statement - and since i am using it on all five of my rigs I would love to hear the official statement of what exact damage we are talking about..

thanks again !!!!

And thank you

Okay so the GPU reorder saga brought up a few issues, lemme explain just for reassurance.

OpenCL and the ATI Display Library have completely different numbers for their devices - and there is no way to correlate the devices

- If they report exactly the same number of devices, and ADL was working properly (built in etc) then the last release worked fine.
- However OpenCL will report more devices than ADL if you have more than one display connected to one GPU.
- OpenCL will report less devices than ADL if you have a card that has no mining support.
- ADL will report only one device if you don't export DISPLAY on linux, or if you use some remote viewer on windows (I think).

On 2.2.0:
If you had less ADL devices than OpenCL, only the ADL devices would work, but the devices that worked on 2.2.0 would be different to the ones working on 2.1.2 because of the changed order.
->If you had less ADL devices, it would put all the mining threads on the one device.
If you had more ADL devices than OpenCL, hardware monitoring wouldn't work.
->If hardware monitoring didn't work, you often couldn't mine at all/crash whatnot.
On Linux the ordering was almost never out of order (unlike windows) but it was reversed. However it was not universally reversed...

On 2.2.1: Now I can cope with discrepancies in the number of devices and still have the option of trying to reorder by bus ID. So it's quite a safe option now, whereas previously it worked more often than not, but when it didn't work it would do weird and wonderful things.

It was getting impossible to debug this without a real mining rig and it was just fortuitous that my rig came back to me yesterday.

All in all, I was just dealing with more AMD facepalm...

[ocminer]

ckolivas if you need a rig for testing, let me now / drop me a mail and we'll find a way

ocminer

[-ck]

Thanks a lot, but as I said, mine came back yesterday so assuming it stays up and running with the new motherboard, I will be fine 

[cypherdoc]

sorry to ask this but this thread is so fricking long!

when will cgminer support 7xxx video cards?

[gnar1ta$]

sorry to ask this but this thread is so fricking long!

when will cgminer support 7xxx video cards?

It does, just not well. If you would like to help improve it look here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=61027.0

[cypherdoc]

sorry to ask this but this thread is so fricking long!

when will cgminer support 7xxx video cards?

It does, just not well. If you would like to help improve it look here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=61027.0

LOL, i don't own one and i just sent him some btc!  but i guess one day i might...

[jjiimm_64]

sorry to ask this but this thread is so fricking long!

when will cgminer support 7xxx video cards?

It does, just not well. If you would like to help improve it look here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=61027.0

LOL, i don't own one and i just sent him some btc!  but i guess one day i might...

thank you.  your probably the 'unknown' i just put on the list

[cypherdoc]

sorry to ask this but this thread is so fricking long!

when will cgminer support 7xxx video cards?

It does, just not well. If you would like to help improve it look here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=61027.0

LOL, i don't own one and i just sent him some btc!  but i guess one day i might...

thank you.  your probably the 'unknown' i just put on the list

no, i'm not the one.  the btc i sent was to ckolivas directly.

[Vbs]

This is tricky. It's very hard rolling back on such a big change. However I do think it was not the best idea to do it by default and the release has only been out one day. I suspect going to 2.2.0 will break far more people's configurations than going from 2.2.0 to 2.2.1, and then using the --gpu-reorder option will fix it (which is what I decided to call it). So, sorry, I've pretty much decided to make it default to off.

I am sorry to hear that but I understand.

BTW.  I have an interesting error.  Because of BSOD when trying to update my drivers I reinstalled windows.  I installed 11.12 but not SDK.  Then installed SDK 2.5 from driver version 11.7.

2.1.12 works flawlessly.  No reduction in hashrate, and no CPU bug.

2.2.0 bombs out when starting w/ error (and yes I should have quoted it exactly ) about OpenCL compiled 0 byte binary.  It then loads the display w/ all cards listed as "off" and then promptly hard faults (Windows: cgminer.exe has encountered an error and will be closed).

Haven't done any investigating because 2.1.12 works fine and after upgrading my entire Linux farm to BAMT (working flawless w/ cgminer now BTW) and reinstalling windows I am done with upgrades for a few days.

Did you try other versions of the 2.5 SDK, aside from 11.7? Any performance differences?

I just did a quick review of SDK versions from driver 11.6 to 12.1 and this is what I got:
(In bold are the highest minors for each major version)

SDK2.4 - SDK 2.4.595.10
11.6     - SDK 2.4.650.9
11.7     - SDK 2.5.684.213
SDK2.5 - SDK 2.5.684.213
11.8     - SDK 2.5.709.2
11.9     - SDK 2.5.732.1
11.10   - SDK 2.5.775.2
11.11   - SDK 2.5.793.1
SDK2.6 - SDK 2.6.831.4
11.12   - SDK 2.6 (10.0.831.4)
12.1     - SDK 2.6 (10.0.851.4)

I'm currently on 11.6 (driver & sdk 2.4.650.9) with 2x5850's but I think I'll try 12.1 with SDK 2.5.793.1 from the 11.11 driver to see how it goes!

Cheers!

[-ck]

Almost 24 hours has passed since 2.2.1 without massive death and destruction this time. Thank goodness. 

[cablepair]

This is tricky. It's very hard rolling back on such a big change. However I do think it was not the best idea to do it by default and the release has only been out one day. I suspect going to 2.2.0 will break far more people's configurations than going from 2.2.0 to 2.2.1, and then using the --gpu-reorder option will fix it (which is what I decided to call it). So, sorry, I've pretty much decided to make it default to off.

I am sorry to hear that but I understand.

BTW.  I have an interesting error.  Because of BSOD when trying to update my drivers I reinstalled windows.  I installed 11.12 but not SDK.  Then installed SDK 2.5 from driver version 11.7.

2.1.12 works flawlessly.  No reduction in hashrate, and no CPU bug.

2.2.0 bombs out when starting w/ error (and yes I should have quoted it exactly ) about OpenCL compiled 0 byte binary.  It then loads the display w/ all cards listed as "off" and then promptly hard faults (Windows: cgminer.exe has encountered an error and will be closed).

Haven't done any investigating because 2.1.12 works fine and after upgrading my entire Linux farm to BAMT (working flawless w/ cgminer now BTW) and reinstalling windows I am done with upgrades for a few days.

Did you try other versions of the 2.5 SDK, aside from 11.7? Any performance differences?

I just did a quick review of SDK versions from driver 11.6 to 12.1 and this is what I got:
(In bold are the highest minors for each major version)

SDK2.4 - SDK 2.4.595.10
11.6     - SDK 2.4.650.9
11.7     - SDK 2.5.684.213
SDK2.5 - SDK 2.5.684.213
11.8     - SDK 2.5.709.2
11.9     - SDK 2.5.732.1
11.10   - SDK 2.5.775.2
11.11   - SDK 2.5.793.1
SDK2.6 - SDK 2.6.831.4
11.12   - SDK 2.6 (10.0.831.4)
12.1     - SDK 2.6 (10.0.851.4)

I'm currently on 11.6 (driver & sdk 2.4.650.9) with 2x5850's but I think I'll try 12.1 with SDK 2.5.793.1 from the 11.11 driver to see how it goes!

Cheers!

thank you for posting that information, thats quite useful info, I have tested them all and the best for mining with 5xxxx in windows is 11.9 without a doubt

[Vbs]

thank you for posting that information, thats quite useful info, I have tested them all and the best for mining with 5xxxx in windows is 11.9 without a doubt

The 11.9 driver or the SDK that comes with it? Or both?

Remember that you can use any combination of driver/sdk, for example you could install 12.1 and afterwards install SDK 2.5.732.1 (which comes packed with the 11.9 driver).

[ngzhang]

But by then, it's too late (and the FPGA destroyed), right?

should be not. if only the heatsink is still on the chip, the FPGA is hard to burnout by a fan fail. a FPGA only generate about 6~7W heat, much less than a GPU. but it will output error data at first.

I'm at a loss as to why option 6 needs to be requested for these FPGA's
(Yeah this is the 2nd one to be mentioned here in the cgminer thread and also the 2nd time the question had to be asked)
Do all the companies who make these things believe that their device will never have heat problems?

Fans stop, rooms get hot, some countries even have summer every year
If it works fine for 24 hours straight without causing any damage when you put it in an oven at 50 degrees Celsius without a fan running on the FPGA, then OK yep knowing the temp may not be necessary
Otherwise ... temp monitoring is necessary.
(Fan rate would be good too but not mandatory: temp will go up if the fan dies anyway)

  FPGA mining is not a heat concentrated project. engineers rarely pay attention to overheating protection on these stuff. at least that's my case.
spartan-6 FPGAs haven't a built-in thermal sensor. so a monitor of temperature needs additional hardware, and logic in the FPGA.
may i put a "heat switch" on board, and simply reset the FPGA when they reached a TEMP protect point? so the software will notice the FPGAs stopped and tigger some exception handling code?