CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded GPU kernels.

[Liquid71]

the most precious of all this is the miner itself ... the software that drives all this ...

i want to be able to help with 'incentive' to continue development and financial gain to grow - as would most of us here that use the fruits of your ( and other devs ) labor ...

help us help you by giving us more ideas to bring this about ... i need ideas not just from my self - but also from the community and from the devs themselves that can benefit greatly from successful ideas to incentivize the development of opensource to the level that it can not be outperformed very easily ...

Maybe a subscription service, pay a monthly fee to get newest miners. Or a less desirable but possibly more effective route would be closed source miners that donate a percentage of hashes like the claymore AMD miner for cryptonote algo. I only say less desirable because I like open source. Or just set a price for each new version. I think people are willing to pay but when it's voluntary it's easy to forget or procrastinate or just be greedy.

I don't post much but have donated to the ccminer devs and will continue to, without you guys we couldn't mine 

Sent a couple beers to SP a58c7f816250c31b2f045e963a0e39aaeab8c98212bac77a6d1ee210665a8d99

[Grout]

I have a really weird issue since upgrading to release 61. 5*750Ti rig (CentOS6, CUDA6.5), mining Quark: ccminer reports about 6100kH per card, and a total of 30500. But the pool reports about 24000, with 0% rejected shares.

First, I thought it came from the pool, so I tried with Nicehash and Hashpower. Same result on both: 24 MH.

Then, I thought one of the cards was dead and ccminer still reported it working for some reason. Removed one card, ran for 30 minutes on Nicehash, removed the next card, etc... I consistently got 18MH, never mind which card I removed...

Finally, I thought it came from ccminer and tried to run release 60 again. Same results!

I'm at a loss. Does anybody have any idea what could be causing this?


Edit: I tried lyra2v2 to see if it was quark-specific: r61 got about 50% reject with reason: high hash. r60 reports around 19.6MH, pool says 19.2 after 10 minutes. So it IS quark-specific. Any idea SP?

[antho281]

Try compiling directly from source not from 1.5.61 There were a fix about that on Quark after .61 released!
I had the same problem and now it everything looks alright

[Grout]

Maybe a subscription service, pay a monthly fee to get newest miners. Or a less desirable but possibly more effective route would be closed source miners that donate a percentage of hashes like the claymore AMD miner for cryptonote algo. I only say less desirable because I like open source. Or just set a price for each new version. I think people are willing to pay but when it's voluntary it's easy to forget or procrastinate or just be greedy.

The issue with a flat price (subscription or per-release) is that it creates a barrier to entry for people will little hardware. If the miner costs more than you can hope to make with your card, you don't buy it. Big farms, on the other hand, only spend a small fraction of their earnings to pay for the same miner.
That's why I prefer a percentage donation: the more you make, the more you support the developer. That's what I've been trying to do for SP, giving a day's worth of profits every two weeks. When I do this, it's just beers, but if a big farm did the same, it could become a living wage...

[scryptr]

Try compiling directly from source not from 1.5.61 There were a fix about that on Quark after .61 released!
I had the same problem and now it everything looks alright

RELEASE PACKAGE dot 61 FIXED--

SP_ fixed release dot 61, re-packaged it, and posted the fixed release.  If you can't compile, the zip package works correctly now.  The original release dot 61 was causing me a loss of ~20% at the pool, it does work correctly now.

       --scryptr

[Grout]

Try compiling directly from source not from 1.5.61 There were a fix about that on Quark after .61 released!
I had the same problem and now it everything looks alright

Thanks, compiling HEAD version did the trick, I was going insane... Cards are reporting 6000kH instead of 6100, but this time, it's real.
Nice of ccminer to display cards temperatures and fan speeds, by the way :-)

[hashbrown9000]

ok, will try to compile the latest and see if i can solo mine on lyra2v2. previous versions would crash after 2 minutes, but djm's lyra miner works great. will post back with results.

[antho281]

@Grout : Great to know!

@Hashbrown : What are you mining with?

[hashbrown9000]

6x 750ti cards on kopiemtu USB stick install (Lubuntu 14.04)

[antho281]

if it still crash, try to start ccminer in 3 differents tabs (2 x 750 Ti per tab), it worked for me
And then I upgraded my RAM and CPU

[hashbrown9000]

if it still crash, try to start ccminer in 3 differents tabs (2 x 750 Ti per tab), it worked for me Smiley
And then I upgraded my RAM and CPU

I disagree. djm's miner works perfectly for solo mining and is rock stable.  SP_'s errors out for some reason. It's something in the code.

[antho281]

Just saying that when I upgraded my RAM and CPU (had to change it ), I didn't meet the error again.

[hashbrown9000]

Here's a few lines of the core dump.  I had a few pages, but don't want to clog up the thread here.

*** buffer overflow detected ***: ./ccminer terminated
======= Backtrace: =========
/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(+0x7338f)[0x7f464ee5438f]
/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(__fortify_fail+0x5c)[0x7f464eeebc9c]
/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(+0x109b60)[0x7f464eeeab60]
/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(+0x109069)[0x7f464eeea069]
/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(_IO_default_xsputn+0xbc)[0x7f464ee5c70c]
/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(_IO_vfprintf+0x1cd5)[0x7f464ee2c9c5]
/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(__vsprintf_chk+0x84)[0x7f464eeea0f4]
/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(__sprintf_chk+0x7d)[0x7f464eeea04d]
./ccminer[0x40f322]
./ccminer[0x410f6c]
/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpthread.so.0(+0x8182)[0x7f465040c182]
/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(clone+0x6d)[0x7f464eedb47d]
======= Memory map: ========
00400000-01a85000 r-xp 00000000 08:02 245501                             /opt/miners/ccminer-sp926/ccminer/ccminer
01c84000-01c85000 r--p 01684000 08:02 245501                             /opt/miners/ccminer-sp926/ccminer/ccminer
01c85000-01c89000 rw-p 01685000 08:02 245501                             /opt/miners/ccminer-sp926/ccminer/ccminer
01c89000-07ed0000 rw-p 00000000 00:00 0
08451000-098fb000 rw-p 00000000 00:00 0                                  [heap]
200000000-200100000 rw-s 6b8e7000 00:05 10233                            /dev/nvidiactl

........................

[antho281]

Forget about what I told then haha

[bensam1231]

the most precious of all this is the miner itself ... the software that drives all this ...

i want to be able to help with 'incentive' to continue development and financial gain to grow - as would most of us here that use the fruits of your ( and other devs ) labor ...

help us help you by giving us more ideas to bring this about ... i need ideas not just from my self - but also from the community and from the devs themselves that can benefit greatly from successful ideas to incentivize the development of opensource to the level that it can not be outperformed very easily ...

Maybe a subscription service, pay a monthly fee to get newest miners. Or a less desirable but possibly more effective route would be closed source miners that donate a percentage of hashes like the claymore AMD miner for cryptonote algo. I only say less desirable because I like open source. Or just set a price for each new version. I think people are willing to pay but when it's voluntary it's easy to forget or procrastinate or just be greedy.

I don't post much but have donated to the ccminer devs and will continue to, without you guys we couldn't mine 

Sent a couple beers to SP a58c7f816250c31b2f045e963a0e39aaeab8c98212bac77a6d1ee210665a8d99

Yeah that'd be great, but none of the devs want to do that... I suggested the very same thing.

Maybe a subscription service, pay a monthly fee to get newest miners. Or a less desirable but possibly more effective route would be closed source miners that donate a percentage of hashes like the claymore AMD miner for cryptonote algo. I only say less desirable because I like open source. Or just set a price for each new version. I think people are willing to pay but when it's voluntary it's easy to forget or procrastinate or just be greedy.

The issue with a flat price (subscription or per-release) is that it creates a barrier to entry for people will little hardware. If the miner costs more than you can hope to make with your card, you don't buy it. Big farms, on the other hand, only spend a small fraction of their earnings to pay for the same miner.
That's why I prefer a percentage donation: the more you make, the more you support the developer. That's what I've been trying to do for SP, giving a day's worth of profits every two weeks. When I do this, it's just beers, but if a big farm did the same, it could become a living wage...

As Grout said, if you've been around the community, some of the flat fees are way too high and they're based on just a handful of very large transactions, which kills things for the average miner. I agree about a percentage based mining fee.

[sp_]

Edit: I tried lyra2v2 to see if it was quark-specific: r61 got about 50% reject with reason: high hash. r60 reports around 19.6MH, pool says 19.2 after 10 minutes. So it IS quark-specific. Any idea SP?

in release 61 when mining lyra2v2 you don't need to use the --diff 2 on nicehash.com and other pools. On givemecoins you need to use --diff 0.5

If you build from head the lyra2v2 has been optimized 2-3% on compute 5.2 devices. (gtx 960, 970, 980,980ti)

[sp_]

the most precious of all this is the miner itself ... the software that drives all this ...
i want to be able to help with 'incentive' to continue development and financial gain to grow - as would most of us here that use the fruits of your ( and other devs ) labor ...
help us help you by giving us more ideas to bring this about ... i need ideas not just from my self - but also from the community and from the devs themselves that can benefit greatly from successful ideas to incentivize the development of opensource to the level that it can not be outperformed very easily ...

Maybe a subscription service, pay a monthly fee to get newest miners. Or a less desirable but possibly more effective route would be closed source miners that donate a percentage of hashes like the claymore AMD miner for cryptonote algo. I only say less desirable because I like open source. Or just set a price for each new version. I think people are willing to pay but when it's voluntary it's easy to forget or procrastinate or just be greedy.
I don't post much but have donated to the ccminer devs and will continue to, without you guys we couldn't mine 
Sent a couple beers to SP a58c7f816250c31b2f045e963a0e39aaeab8c98212bac77a6d1ee210665a8d99

Thanks for your support

[chrysophylax]

the most precious of all this is the miner itself ... the software that drives all this ...
i want to be able to help with 'incentive' to continue development and financial gain to grow - as would most of us here that use the fruits of your ( and other devs ) labor ...
help us help you by giving us more ideas to bring this about ... i need ideas not just from my self - but also from the community and from the devs themselves that can benefit greatly from successful ideas to incentivize the development of opensource to the level that it can not be outperformed very easily ...

Maybe a subscription service, pay a monthly fee to get newest miners. Or a less desirable but possibly more effective route would be closed source miners that donate a percentage of hashes like the claymore AMD miner for cryptonote algo. I only say less desirable because I like open source. Or just set a price for each new version. I think people are willing to pay but when it's voluntary it's easy to forget or procrastinate or just be greedy.
I don't post much but have donated to the ccminer devs and will continue to, without you guys we couldn't mine 
Sent a couple beers to SP a58c7f816250c31b2f045e963a0e39aaeab8c98212bac77a6d1ee210665a8d99

Thanks for your support

so any ideas sp? ... what would you prefer? ... just donations? ...

#crysx

[sp_]

so any ideas sp? ... what would you prefer? ... just donations? ...
#crysx

I can include a 1% fee, and keep it opensource. I just need to refork tvpruvot's work, and add my modded kernals. The 1.6.6 version supports mining to multiple pools.
Then I just need to optimize every algo a few percent, and everybody would use my optimized kernals...

[chrysophylax]

so any ideas sp? ... what would you prefer? ... just donations? ...
#crysx

I can include a 1% fee, and keep it opensource. I just need to refork tvpruvot's work, and add my modded kernals. The 1.6.6 version supports mining to multiple pools.
Then I just need to optimize every algo a few percent, and everybody would use my optimized kernals...

ok - so you are going with the included percentage fee for use with the spmod miner? ...

opensource is still the way to go - so thats a good thing ...

will this also mean that the 'inhouse / private' optimizations will come out for the general public with the 1% mining? ... or will you still have the private optimizations as being something that would still be up for sale? ...

also - when you say multipool support - does that mean autoswitching algos? ...

#crysx