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

[canford]

No 4.6.0 Windows executable?

My mistake, sorry. Uploaded.

Thanks, works.

[-ck]

Regarding the S3.

I don't have the build environment to create a full binary image, and the code will need a LOT of work to actually become part of mainline cgminer it seems, but for the time being here is a link to a bugfixed binary of cgminer 4.6.0 for the S3 based on the bitmain code. Copy the file into /usr/bin/ on the S3 overwriting the existing one:

http://ck.kolivas.org/apps/cgminer/antminer/s3/4.6.0-140908/cgminer

[Askit2]

Regarding the S3.

I don't have the build environment to create a full binary image, and the code will need a LOT of work to actually become part of mainline cgminer it seems, but for the time being here is a link to a bugfixed binary of cgminer 4.6.0 for the S3 based on the bitmain code. Copy the file into /usr/bin/ on the S3 overwriting the existing one:

http://ck.kolivas.org/apps/cgminer/antminer/s3/4.6.0-140908/cgminer

Thank You for the fix. Processor load is way down. It is really great to get this working even better. Hopefully both of mine can now handle 218 not one 218 and one 212.

[konradp]

Hi,

I see these messages when cgminer works, but can't find any documentation regarding them. What do they mean?

They didn't come one after another, I only collected the messages I don't understand. Here we go:

BFL looking for BFL 0403:6014 but found 1002:4396 instead

Not a ZTEX device 1002:4397
 and later: USB scan devices: checking for BAS devices

AVA looking for AVA 0403:6001 but found 148f:5370 instead

ICA looking for BLT 0403:6001 but found 148f:5370 instead

GPU 2 found something? OCL, NONCE 8.... found in slot 0

Generated stratum header 000....

Generated stratum work

I'd be grateful for any help.

[-ck]

Hi,

I see these messages when cgminer works, but can't find any documentation regarding them. What do they mean?

They didn't come one after another, I only collected the messages I don't understand. Here we go:

BFL looking for BFL 0403:6014 but found 1002:4396 instead

Not a ZTEX device 1002:4397
 and later: USB scan devices: checking for BAS devices

AVA looking for AVA 0403:6001 but found 148f:5370 instead

ICA looking for BLT 0403:6001 but found 148f:5370 instead

GPU 2 found something? OCL, NONCE 8.... found in slot 0

Generated stratum header 000....

Generated stratum work

I'd be grateful for any help.

I'm not sure where you're seeing these messages. There hasn't been any GPU code in mainline cgminer for over a year and I'm not supporting anything but the current version.

[konradp]

I'm not sure where you're seeing these messages. There hasn't been any GPU code in mainline cgminer for over a year and I'm not supporting anything but the current version.

Thanks @ckolivas.

This is the output of cgminer.

I use it to mine on testnet. There are 4 radeon 79xx gpu cards, and according to cgminer stats it does ~2.5gh/s - I was hoping to mine something, especially that current testnet difficulty == 1.0, but it doesn't work, hence I posted this warning(?) messages.

[abracadabra]

I'm not sure where you're seeing these messages. There hasn't been any GPU code in mainline cgminer for over a year and I'm not supporting anything but the current version.

Thanks @ckolivas.

This is the output of cgminer.

I use it to mine on testnet. There are 4 radeon 79xx gpu cards, and according to cgminer stats it does ~2.5gh/s - I was hoping to mine something, especially that current testnet difficulty == 1.0, but it doesn't work, hence I posted this warning(?) messages.

Which version? 

[spiceminer15]

ckolivas, any idea why the new firmware & cgminer version on the s3 would stop access via the API?

I don't have an s3 yet, mine will be here soon though, they have been shipped from china... but in the meantime users of my app are saying when they upgrade firmware and install newest version of cgminer app doesn't have access to api. they've said they still have api access enabled.

when I wrote the app I used the API specs that were in github. it worked before the update.

i'll be able to test when my s3 come but thought maybe someone knew off that top of their head

[Roy Badami]

As the sun sets on the home mining scene [...]

I suspect there will be people mining at home for fun pretty much forever.  And home mining for profit has been pretty much impossible for years - at least not without a huge amount of luck - although many people let wishful thinking cloud their judgment.

Thanks for the new release - I will test it out on a couple of Monarchs shortly :-)

roy

[Count_Frackula]

ckolivas, any idea why the new firmware & cgminer version on the s3 would stop access via the API?

I don't have an s3 yet, mine will be here soon though, they have been shipped from china... but in the meantime users of my app are saying when they upgrade firmware and install newest version of cgminer app doesn't have access to api. they've said they still have api access enabled.

when I wrote the app I used the API specs that were in github. it worked before the update.

i'll be able to test when my s3 come but thought maybe someone knew off that top of their head

Working fine for me.

[spiceminer15]

ckolivas, any idea why the new firmware & cgminer version on the s3 would stop access via the API?

I don't have an s3 yet, mine will be here soon though, they have been shipped from china... but in the meantime users of my app are saying when they upgrade firmware and install newest version of cgminer app doesn't have access to api. they've said they still have api access enabled.

when I wrote the app I used the API specs that were in github. it worked before the update.

i'll be able to test when my s3 come but thought maybe someone knew off that top of their head

Working fine for me.

ok. I might be end user error. I didn't think the API would change all of a sudden

[Roy Badami]

Not immediately detecting my Monarchs.

Am I right in thinking that all I should need is --enable-bflsc at build time (and nothing special at run time)?

[Roy Badami]

Not immediately detecting my Monarchs.

Am I right in thinking that all I should need is --enable-bflsc at build time (and nothing special at run time)?

Ah, it appears that production Monarchs (or at least these two) have iProduct set to "BitFORCE SHA256".  A quick edit of usbutils.c and we're hashing (albeit with a warning at startup about an unknown firmware version).

Note that this iProduct string seems to be the same as the old BFL FPGAs.  I've no idea whether this matters - although I'm not compiling the old bitforce driver so it clearly doesn't matter to me.

[kano]

ckolivas, any idea why the new firmware & cgminer version on the s3 would stop access via the API?

I don't have an s3 yet, mine will be here soon though, they have been shipped from china... but in the meantime users of my app are saying when they upgrade firmware and install newest version of cgminer app doesn't have access to api. they've said they still have api access enabled.

when I wrote the app I used the API specs that were in github. it worked before the update.

i'll be able to test when my s3 come but thought maybe someone knew off that top of their head

Working fine for me.

ok. I might be end user error. I didn't think the API would change all of a sudden

S3 disables write access to the API and ignores the _aa setting.
I'm not sure which versions do this setting or if it is all of them.
I've had 3 different versions (my first S3 controller board went strange and Bitmain replaced it quickly for me) so I'm not sure.

In /etc/init.d/cgminer mine had:

PARAMS="$AOPTIONS $POOL1 $POOL2 $POOL3 $_pb $_ow $_bec --api-listen --api-network --bitmain-checkn2diff --bitmain-hwerror --queue 4096"

Instead I change it to:

PARAMS="$AOPTIONS $POOL1 $POOL2 $POOL3 $_pb $_ow $_bec --api-listen --api-allow $_aa --bitmain-checkn2diff --bitmain-hwerror --queue 1024"

(though 1024 can probably be lower - I've not checked what it should be)

[kano]

Not immediately detecting my Monarchs.

Am I right in thinking that all I should need is --enable-bflsc at build time (and nothing special at run time)?

Ah, it appears that production Monarchs (or at least these two) have iProduct set to "BitFORCE SHA256".  A quick edit of usbutils.c and we're hashing (albeit with a warning at startup about an unknown firmware version).

Note that this iProduct string seems to be the same as the old BFL FPGAs.  I've no idea whether this matters - although I'm not compiling the old bitforce driver so it clearly doesn't matter to me.

I wonder if that is true of all the new ones
Maybe BFL doesn't like cgminer working with it - though they indirectly paid for the driver ...
My original moth has been mining fine at ~250W, ~330GH/s at the pool, for over 2 months now

[Roy Badami]

I wonder if that is true of all the new ones
Maybe BFL doesn't like cgminer working with it - though they indirectly paid for the driver ...
My original moth has been mining fine at ~250W, ~330GH/s at the pool, for over 2 months now

I would assume it must be true of at least all the ones shipping right now.  Seems unlikely that mine are special in some way.

BTW, is there/will there be any access to underclocking/undervolting?  I'm pretty sure BFL promised this would be possible...

roy

[-ck]

I wonder if that is true of all the new ones
Maybe BFL doesn't like cgminer working with it - though they indirectly paid for the driver ...
My original moth has been mining fine at ~250W, ~330GH/s at the pool, for over 2 months now

I would assume it must be true of at least all the ones shipping right now.  Seems unlikely that mine are special in some way.

BTW, is there/will there be any access to underclocking/undervolting?  I'm pretty sure BFL promised this would be possible...

Just like last time, the cgminer development team is mostly in the dark and treated as 3rd class citizens by BFL so we have no idea when they change firmwares (like you experienced by them changing the ID string) or add features or whatever. Infuriating, but then our complaints are minor compared to customers.

[TrevorS]

Could someone please explain the practical difference between Cgminer "balanced" (shares) Vs "load balanced" (quota) pool selections.  What are the advantages and disadvantages of one Vs the other?  I'm finding it too obtuse !  Thanks in advance for your assistance !

[rav3n_pl]

One is counting shares you return, second is counting getworks you take.

[wolf_miner]

Hi, using --load-balance strategy is possible to split the complessive hashrate at 2 user (33% USER1/ 66% USER2) on the same pool (POOL_ABC)?

"pools" : [
        {
                "quota"  : "1;POOL_ABC:3333",
                "user" : "USER1",
                "pass" : "123"
        },
        {
                "quota" : "2;POOL_ABC:3333",
                "user" : "USER2",
                "pass" : "123"
        }
]

Thanks in advance W_M