Bitcoin Forum
October 01, 2016, 04:51:07 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.0 (New!) [Torrent]. Make sure you verify it.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: bitcoin generation broken in 0.3.8? (64-bit)  (Read 4252 times)
lfm
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196



View Profile
August 08, 2010, 03:06:59 AM
 #1

I was starting to wonder when my systems seemed to quit generating coins if there was something going on. They went from about 1 block / day to none in a week.

ArtForz in irc suggested I run a test isolated net with two nodes only connected to each other with empty wallet dir. I took a couple of quad core systems and set them up. they have produced no blocks in about 90 minutes now while hashing at a combined rate of over 8000 khash/sec. Is this evidence of a problem yet or is it more bad luck?

The systems are Linux 64 bit one Intel quad q6600 and one AMD quad phenom II 940.

1475297467
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1475297467

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1475297467
Reply with quote  #2

1475297467
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
FreeMoney
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246


Strength in numbers


View Profile WWW
August 08, 2010, 03:09:03 AM
 #2

The difficulty went up again just after 3.8 was out. I have not gotten any with 4000khash in about 15 days, so 90 minutes of 8000k doesn't mean much. I'm sure we'd know if 3.8 wasn't generating any blocks.

Play Bitcoin Poker at sealswithclubs.eu. We're active and open to everyone.
lfm
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196



View Profile
August 08, 2010, 03:13:09 AM
 #3

The difficulty went up again just after 3.8 was out. I have not gotten any with 4000khash in about 15 days, so 90 minutes of 8000k doesn't mean much. I'm sure we'd know if 3.8 wasn't generating any blocks.


This is on an isolated test net with just two machines, connections = 1, difficulty = 1
lfm
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196



View Profile
August 08, 2010, 03:14:54 AM
 #4

The difficulty went up again just after 3.8 was out. I have not gotten any with 4000khash in about 15 days, so 90 minutes of 8000k doesn't mean much. I'm sure we'd know if 3.8 wasn't generating any blocks.

maybe only a problem with 64 bit linux or something

knightmb
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308


Timekoin - Save Electricity, Don't Waste It!


View Profile WWW
August 08, 2010, 03:24:29 AM
 #5

I haven't had any problems with 0.3.8 release, generated some coin on windows and Linux clients (32/64)bit just fine this week.

FreeMoney
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246


Strength in numbers


View Profile WWW
August 08, 2010, 03:38:21 AM
 #6

The difficulty went up again just after 3.8 was out. I have not gotten any with 4000khash in about 15 days, so 90 minutes of 8000k doesn't mean much. I'm sure we'd know if 3.8 wasn't generating any blocks.


This is on an isolated test net with just two machines, connections = 1, difficulty = 1


Oh, that is odd then, that would be like not finding one in over 500 hours, possible I guess, but getting out there

Play Bitcoin Poker at sealswithclubs.eu. We're active and open to everyone.
lfm
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196



View Profile
August 08, 2010, 03:41:26 AM
 #7

I haven't had any problems with 0.3.8 release, generated some coin on windows and Linux clients (32/64)bit just fine this week.

I guess I want to know how long I need to run 8000 khash/s at difficulty 1.0 to have any reasonable evidence of a problem. ArtForz said it should tell me in an hour or so.
ArtForz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406


View Profile
August 08, 2010, 03:43:05 AM
 #8

At ~ 8Mhash/s combined not generating a block at 1.0 diff in over 1h is pretty unlikely.
As in, under 0.1% probability unlikely (50% is ~6 min, 1% ~42 min)
<edit>
Forgot to mention, he's running a custom compile of stock 0.3.8 sources.

bitcoin: 1Fb77Xq5ePFER8GtKRn2KDbDTVpJKfKmpz
i0coin: jNdvyvd6v6gV3kVJLD7HsB5ZwHyHwAkfdw
lfm
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196



View Profile
August 08, 2010, 03:58:09 AM
 #9

I haven't had any problems with 0.3.8 release, generated some coin on windows and Linux clients (32/64)bit just fine this week.

I am wondering if its something odd in the way I have my systems set up or Huh just various plain ubuntu installs so far as I know.
lachesis
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210


View Profile
August 08, 2010, 05:05:04 AM
 #10

I'm having a similar problem with my own compile of the SVN trunk. I just reverted to the stock builds to test and see what happens. I should try setting up my own network of two nodes with my builds.

Bitcoin Calculator | Scallion | GPG Key | WoT Rating | 1QGacAtYA7E8V3BAiM7sgvLg7PZHk5WnYc
lfm
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196



View Profile
August 08, 2010, 07:18:55 AM
 #11

Ok chatting with lachesis in irc he tried this and I get the same result: We added some prints in main.cpp at the SHA calls like so :

Code:
       loop
        {
            SHA256Transform(&tmp.hash1, (char*)&tmp.block + 64, &midstate);
            printf("mid hash =\n");
            for (int i = 0; i < 8; i++)
              printf(" %08x", ((unsigned *)&tmp.hash1)[i]);
            printf("\n");
            SHA256Transform(&hash, &tmp.hash1, pSHA256InitState);
            printf("full hash =\n");
            for (int i = 0; i < 8; i++)
              printf(" %08x", ((unsigned *)&hash)[i]);
            printf("\n");

            if (((unsigned short*)&hash)[14] == 0)

and then in the log we get:

mid hash =
 6a09e667 bb67ae85 3c6ef372 a54ff53a 510e527f 9b05688c 1f83d9ab 5be0cd19
full hash =
 6a09e667 bb67ae85 3c6ef372 a54ff53a 510e527f 9b05688c 1f83d9ab 5be0cd19
mid hash =
 6a09e667 bb67ae85 3c6ef372 a54ff53a 510e527f 9b05688c 1f83d9ab 5be0cd19
full hash =
 6a09e667 bb67ae85 3c6ef372 a54ff53a 510e527f 9b05688c 1f83d9ab 5be0cd19

repeating! The hash call isn't doing anything!
(he maybe got a different repeating value, I don't know)
knightmb
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308


Timekoin - Save Electricity, Don't Waste It!


View Profile WWW
August 08, 2010, 07:20:20 AM
 #12

There is one behavior that I've noticed.

Block sync stalling.

When the client (be it Windows or Linux) has been running for a few days, *sometimes* they get stuck in block limbo. What happens is your client keeps trying to solve the current block and loses track of the entire block system. So as time goes by, other blocks are solved and your PC is still stuck on the same block. The problem is, if you stop and restart the client, it just picks up where it left off on the same stuck block. The only way I've seen to fix this is to delete the block chain so that the client will re-download it.

I've had to clear out a few block chains for a few servers because of this, I'll notice they are stuck on block 70,000 for example, while the rest of the network is working on block 70,839 for example.

That might explain why you go weeks without winning a block with a 24/7 PC going.

The server farm I had running before were spitting out blocks all day, but now that I'm just down to a few dozen servers and the difficulty is way up, I barely see about 3 or 4 blocks a day spread across all of them. But I know the 0.3.8 version is working like it should, except for the occasional block freeze.

lfm
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196



View Profile
August 08, 2010, 10:32:32 AM
 #13

This seems to be a different problem. The blocks do not seem to be "stuck" on my systems. The getinfo shows them up to date

It seems the sha256 code is not getting built right for linux 64. Not sure if/how it could work on some and not on others.

There is one behavior that I've noticed.

Block sync stalling.

When the client (be it Windows or Linux) has been running for a few days, *sometimes* they get stuck in block limbo. What happens is your client keeps trying to solve the current block and loses track of the entire block system. So as time goes by, other blocks are solved and your PC is still stuck on the same block.

...

tcatm
Sr. Member
****
qt
Offline Offline

Activity: 337


View Profile
August 08, 2010, 11:56:54 AM
 #14

Did you compile it yourself? There's a define in makefile.unix. Something like -DCRYPTOPP_DISABLE_SSE2. Remove that. Else the SHA256_Transform will return the initstate. I had the same problem when switchting to 0.3.6.
lfm
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196



View Profile
August 08, 2010, 01:13:30 PM
 #15

Did you compile it yourself? There's a define in makefile.unix. Something like -DCRYPTOPP_DISABLE_SSE2. Remove that. Else the SHA256_Transform will return the initstate. I had the same problem when switchting to 0.3.6.

That seems to be the root of the problem. I think even the bundled binary for Linux 64 in 0.3.8 was compiled wrong then.

lachesis
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210


View Profile
August 08, 2010, 03:47:15 PM
 #16

That seems to be the root of the problem. I think even the bundled binary for Linux 64 in 0.3.8 was compiled wrong then.
That appears to fix it for me too.

EDIT:
I've uploaded corrected Linux builds to http://www.alloscomp.com/bitcoin/binaries/release-r123-2010-08-08/. Enjoy!

Bitcoin Calculator | Scallion | GPG Key | WoT Rating | 1QGacAtYA7E8V3BAiM7sgvLg7PZHk5WnYc
knightmb
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308


Timekoin - Save Electricity, Don't Waste It!


View Profile WWW
August 08, 2010, 05:46:55 PM
 #17

Did you compile it yourself? There's a define in makefile.unix. Something like -DCRYPTOPP_DISABLE_SSE2. Remove that. Else the SHA256_Transform will return the initstate. I had the same problem when switchting to 0.3.6.

That seems to be the root of the problem. I think even the bundled binary for Linux 64 in 0.3.8 was compiled wrong then.

I just tested it out, I get the same results. Repeating values with stock, more random values with the flag modification. Probably needs to be fixed for the next release, though I'm not sure how mine are generating anything then?

nimnul
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 255


View Profile WWW
August 08, 2010, 05:50:10 PM
 #18

@lachesis: 404 not found

@knightmb: What about a fixed CentOS build?

knightmb
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308


Timekoin - Save Electricity, Don't Waste It!


View Profile WWW
August 08, 2010, 05:56:09 PM
 #19

@lachesis: 404 not found

@knightmb: What about a fixed CentOS build?
Should be simple enough for CentOS, I was going to test it out first to see if those suffered the same issue, thought it seems like all the builds would suffer this issue if the compile flag is what makes the difference.

knightmb
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308


Timekoin - Save Electricity, Don't Waste It!


View Profile WWW
August 08, 2010, 06:06:20 PM
 #20

This seems to be a different problem. The blocks do not seem to be "stuck" on my systems. The getinfo shows them up to date

It seems the sha256 code is not getting built right for linux 64. Not sure if/how it could work on some and not on others.

There is one behavior that I've noticed.

Block sync stalling.

When the client (be it Windows or Linux) has been running for a few days, *sometimes* they get stuck in block limbo. What happens is your client keeps trying to solve the current block and loses track of the entire block system. So as time goes by, other blocks are solved and your PC is still stuck on the same block.

...

I'm starting to wonder if the two are connected now since the hashing seems to get stuck, maybe that's why it gets stuck on a block.

Pages: [1] 2 »  All
  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!