Posts by Microcruncher*

\n studio-striking\n
1) Message boards : Wish list : OpenCL app for NVIDIA (Message 6271)
Posted 29 Oct 2014 by Microcruncher*
Post:
http://moowrap.net/forum_thread.php?id=391
2) Message boards : Number crunching : NVIDIA Maxwell (GTX 970) - OpenCL vs CUDA - 1:0 (Message 6270)
Posted 29 Oct 2014 by Microcruncher*
Post:
Driver Version 344.48 (344.16 is buggy and serial crashes on machines with 32 GB RAM), Windows 8.1 - 32 bit CUDA/OpenCL clients from distributed.net:

CUDA Client from Distributed.net (v2.9110.519b):

[Oct 29 17:56:28 UTC] RC5-72: using core #6 (CUDA 4-pipe 64-thd).
[Oct 29 17:56:33 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #6 (CUDA 4-pipe 64-thd)
0.00:00:02.56 [1,705,648,911 keys/sec]


OpenCL Client from Distributed.net (v2.9111.520):

[Oct 29 17:49:05 UTC] RC5-72: using core #0 (CL ANSI 1-pipe).
[Oct 29 17:49:09 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #0 (CL ANSI 1-pipe)
0.00:00:01.93 [2,289,978,422 keys/sec]
[Oct 29 17:49:09 UTC] RC5-72: using core #1 (CL 1-pipe).
[Oct 29 17:49:12 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #1 (CL 1-pipe)
0.00:00:01.65 [2,682,184,538 keys/sec]
[Oct 29 17:49:12 UTC] RC5-72: using core #2 (CL 2-pipe).
[Oct 29 17:49:16 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #2 (CL 2-pipe)
0.00:00:01.54 [2,855,800,503 keys/sec]
[Oct 29 17:49:16 UTC] RC5-72: using core #3 (CL 4-pipe).
[Oct 29 17:49:19 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #3 (CL 4-pipe)
0.00:00:01.81 [2,432,125,750 keys/sec]
[Oct 29 17:49:19 UTC] RC5-72 benchmark summary :
Default core : #-1 (undefined) 0 keys/sec
Fastest core : #2 (CL 2-pipe) 2,855,800,503 keys/sec


Can someone with a 780ti post OpenCL results?
3) Questions and Answers : Preferences : benchmarks (Message 364)
Posted 18 May 2011 by Microcruncher*
Post:
I've posted the Windows Vista SP2 values (dubious results at least) for my GTX 470 @ 607 MHz stock and at 700 MHz in another thread. The Linux results are less "jumpy" and the differences are within a range of a few percent:

Linux x86_64 / GTX 470 / Driver version: 270.41.06 / Stock clocks:

distributed.net client for CUDA 3.1 on Linux Copyright 1997-2009, distributed.net
Please visit http://www.distributed.net/ for up-to-date contest information.
Start the client with '-help' for a list of valid command line options.


dnetc v2.9108-517-CTR-10070313 for CUDA 3.1 on Linux (Linux 2.6.32-5-amd64).
Please provide the *entire* version descriptor when submitting bug reports.
The distributed.net bug report pages are at http://bugs.distributed.net/

[May 18 14:04:31 UTC] RC5-72: using core #0 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd).
[May 18 14:04:42 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #0 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd)                                                           
                      0.00:00:08.79 [491,117,547 keys/sec]
[May 18 14:04:42 UTC] RC5-72: using core #1 (CUDA 1-pipe 128-thd).
[May 18 14:04:52 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #1 (CUDA 1-pipe 128-thd)                                                          
                      0.00:00:08.51 [507,606,843 keys/sec]
[May 18 14:04:52 UTC] RC5-72: using core #2 (CUDA 1-pipe 256-thd).
[May 18 14:05:03 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #2 (CUDA 1-pipe 256-thd)                                                          
                      0.00:00:08.59 [502,783,808 keys/sec]
[May 18 14:05:03 UTC] RC5-72: using core #3 (CUDA 2-pipe 64-thd).
[May 18 14:05:14 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #3 (CUDA 2-pipe 64-thd)                                                           
                      0.00:00:08.65 [498,891,716 keys/sec]
[May 18 14:05:14 UTC] RC5-72: using core #4 (CUDA 2-pipe 128-thd).
[May 18 14:05:25 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #4 (CUDA 2-pipe 128-thd)                                                          
                      0.00:00:08.40 [514,268,438 keys/sec]
[May 18 14:05:25 UTC] RC5-72: using core #5 (CUDA 2-pipe 256-thd).
[May 18 14:05:35 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #5 (CUDA 2-pipe 256-thd)                                                          
                      0.00:00:08.48 [509,478,872 keys/sec]
[May 18 14:05:35 UTC] RC5-72: using core #6 (CUDA 4-pipe 64-thd).
[May 18 14:05:46 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #6 (CUDA 4-pipe 64-thd)                                                           
                      0.00:00:08.59 [502,289,441 keys/sec]
[May 18 14:05:46 UTC] RC5-72: using core #7 (CUDA 4-pipe 128-thd).
[May 18 14:05:56 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #7 (CUDA 4-pipe 128-thd)                                                          
                      0.00:00:08.36 [517,607,292 keys/sec]
[May 18 14:05:56 UTC] RC5-72: using core #8 (CUDA 4-pipe 256-thd).
[May 18 14:06:07 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #8 (CUDA 4-pipe 256-thd)                                                          
                      0.00:00:08.43 [512,468,703 keys/sec]
[May 18 14:06:07 UTC] RC5-72: using core #9 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd busy wait).
[May 18 14:06:19 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #9 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd busy wait)                                                 
                      0.00:00:08.78 [491,695,519 keys/sec]
[May 18 14:06:19 UTC] RC5-72: using core #10 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd sleep 100us).
[May 18 14:06:30 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #10 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd sleep 100us)                                              
                      0.00:00:08.82 [489,091,617 keys/sec]
[May 18 14:06:30 UTC] RC5-72: using core #11 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd sleep dynamic).
[May 18 14:06:41 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #11 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd sleep dynamic)                                            
                      0.00:00:08.78 [491,651,933 keys/sec]
[May 18 14:06:41 UTC] RC5-72 benchmark summary :
                      Default core : #0 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd)
                      Fastest core : #7 (CUDA 4-pipe 128-thd)
[May 18 14:06:41 UTC] Core #7 is significantly faster than the default core.
                      The GPU core selection has been made as a tradeoff between core speed
                      and responsiveness of the graphical desktop.
                      Please file a bug report along with the output of -cpuinfo
                      only if the the faster core selection does not degrade graphics performance.

The GTX 470 is barely able to keep up with a tiny HD 4770. Bit fiddling is the strong point of ATI cards.
4) Questions and Answers : Preferences : Client core values (Message 362)
Posted 18 May 2011 by Microcruncher*
Post:
So the answer is "trial and error"? Mess around until one value rises to the top?

Copy the executable (from DNETC) to another directory and start it with --bench (pause BOINC in the meantime).

You can log the output with -l somefilename.

Here is an example run (Linux/GTX 470):

Some useless info removed

[May 18 14:04:31 UTC] RC5-72: using core #0 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd).
[May 18 14:04:42 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #0 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd)                                                           
                      0.00:00:08.79 [491,117,547 keys/sec]
[May 18 14:04:42 UTC] RC5-72: using core #1 (CUDA 1-pipe 128-thd).
[May 18 14:04:52 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #1 (CUDA 1-pipe 128-thd)                                                          
                      0.00:00:08.51 [507,606,843 keys/sec]
[May 18 14:04:52 UTC] RC5-72: using core #2 (CUDA 1-pipe 256-thd).
[May 18 14:05:03 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #2 (CUDA 1-pipe 256-thd)                                                          
                      0.00:00:08.59 [502,783,808 keys/sec]
[May 18 14:05:03 UTC] RC5-72: using core #3 (CUDA 2-pipe 64-thd).
[May 18 14:05:14 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #3 (CUDA 2-pipe 64-thd)                                                           
                      0.00:00:08.65 [498,891,716 keys/sec]
[May 18 14:05:14 UTC] RC5-72: using core #4 (CUDA 2-pipe 128-thd).
[May 18 14:05:25 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #4 (CUDA 2-pipe 128-thd)                                                          
                      0.00:00:08.40 [514,268,438 keys/sec]
[May 18 14:05:25 UTC] RC5-72: using core #5 (CUDA 2-pipe 256-thd).
[May 18 14:05:35 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #5 (CUDA 2-pipe 256-thd)                                                          
                      0.00:00:08.48 [509,478,872 keys/sec]
[May 18 14:05:35 UTC] RC5-72: using core #6 (CUDA 4-pipe 64-thd).
[May 18 14:05:46 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #6 (CUDA 4-pipe 64-thd)                                                           
                      0.00:00:08.59 [502,289,441 keys/sec]
[May 18 14:05:46 UTC] RC5-72: using core #7 (CUDA 4-pipe 128-thd).
[May 18 14:05:56 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #7 (CUDA 4-pipe 128-thd)                                                          
                      0.00:00:08.36 [517,607,292 keys/sec]
[May 18 14:05:56 UTC] RC5-72: using core #8 (CUDA 4-pipe 256-thd).
[May 18 14:06:07 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #8 (CUDA 4-pipe 256-thd)                                                          
                      0.00:00:08.43 [512,468,703 keys/sec]
[May 18 14:06:07 UTC] RC5-72: using core #9 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd busy wait).
[May 18 14:06:19 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #9 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd busy wait)                                                 
                      0.00:00:08.78 [491,695,519 keys/sec]
[May 18 14:06:19 UTC] RC5-72: using core #10 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd sleep 100us).
[May 18 14:06:30 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #10 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd sleep 100us)                                              
                      0.00:00:08.82 [489,091,617 keys/sec]
[May 18 14:06:30 UTC] RC5-72: using core #11 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd sleep dynamic).
[May 18 14:06:41 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #11 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd sleep dynamic)                                            
                      0.00:00:08.78 [491,651,933 keys/sec]
[May 18 14:06:41 UTC] RC5-72 benchmark summary :
                      Default core : #0 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd)
                      Fastest core : #7 (CUDA 4-pipe 128-thd)
[May 18 14:06:41 UTC] Core #7 is significantly faster than the default core.
                      The GPU core selection has been made as a tradeoff between core speed
                      and responsiveness of the graphical desktop.
                      Please file a bug report along with the output of -cpuinfo
                      only if the the faster core selection does not degrade graphics performance.

They key info is:

                      Fastest core : #7 (CUDA 4-pipe 128-thd)

Your mileage may vary.

This info is also important:

[May 18 14:06:41 UTC] Core #7 is significantly faster than the default core.
The GPU core selection has been made as a tradeoff between core speed
and responsiveness of the graphical desktop.
Please file a bug report along with the output of -cpuinfo
only if the the faster core selection does not degrade graphics performance.

If the selected core makes problems (laggy screen updates, too much CPU load, GPUs glowing red) you can try a another core. Cores number 9, 10 and 11 use the same code as core number 1 but coordinate the CPU and the GPU by different methods. The other cores are also variations of core #1 but they differ in the way they divide the work that is sent to the multiprocessing units of the GPU.
5) Questions and Answers : Preferences : Client core values (Message 361)
Posted 18 May 2011 by Microcruncher*
Post:
So I did the bench test and found core 3 was significantly faster. As such I configured the app to use core 3. From the results since I made that configuration change the core setting seems to be ignored at the app continues to use core 0


I can only speak for myself but selecting any other core than the default -1 didn't work with the windows 1.01 wrapper/app (The app exits and does nothing, after ten retries it's calculation error time). The Linux 1.01 wrapper/app happily ignores the setting (Core #7 is the fastest here).

Note: The Linux BOINC client just downloaded the new 1.02 wrapper/app. I have aborted all 1.01 tasks. 1.02 does work as expected.
6) Questions and Answers : Windows : inconclusive work (Message 230)
Posted 11 May 2011 by Microcruncher*
Post:
I need to fix that but rest assured that partial credit for those results will be granted. :)

-w

Thank you.
7) Message boards : Wish list : Fixed credits based on the amount of work done (Message 193)
Posted 10 May 2011 by Microcruncher*
Post:
If I downclock my card the tasks take longer to run and and granted credits increase. The average credits per second/day doesn't change regardless how slow my card runs.

The amount of work being done is known and deterministic, so fixed credits should be calculated based on the work done.
8) Questions and Answers : Windows : inconclusive work (Message 192)
Posted 10 May 2011 by Microcruncher*
Post:
Another one:

http://moowrap.net/workunit.php?wuid=54907

http://moowrap.net/result.php?resultid=62471
9) Questions and Answers : Windows : CUDA app 1.01 crashes when a core is manually selected (Message 173)
Posted 8 May 2011 by Microcruncher*
Post:
Microcruncher: we'll look into that bug.
Do you have the same behavior if you choose any other core or just this one?

Thanks for this report.

I tried #9 and #10 based own my own DNETC experience and the infos I read in another thread. It looks like the wrapper has problems to start the application when a non-default core is selected (core != -1).

FYI: Benchmarking with the client worked fine but exposed another oddity:

Stock clocks (608 MHz):

[May 08 19:59:55 UTC] nvcuda.dll Version: 8.17.12.6658
[May 08 19:59:55 UTC] RC5-72: using core #0 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd).
[May 08 20:00:07 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #0 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd)
                      0.00:00:09.00 [482,940,286 keys/sec]
[May 08 20:00:07 UTC] RC5-72: using core #1 (CUDA 1-pipe 128-thd).
[May 08 20:00:26 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #1 (CUDA 1-pipe 128-thd)
                      0.00:00:16.70 [271,027,727 keys/sec]
[May 08 20:00:26 UTC] RC5-72: using core #2 (CUDA 1-pipe 256-thd).
[May 08 20:00:45 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #2 (CUDA 1-pipe 256-thd)
                      0.00:00:16.24 [272,199,342 keys/sec]
[May 08 20:00:45 UTC] RC5-72: using core #3 (CUDA 2-pipe 64-thd).
[May 08 20:01:04 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #3 (CUDA 2-pipe 64-thd)
                      0.00:00:16.41 [267,968,215 keys/sec]
[May 08 20:01:04 UTC] RC5-72: using core #4 (CUDA 2-pipe 128-thd).
[May 08 20:01:22 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #4 (CUDA 2-pipe 128-thd)
                      0.00:00:16.06 [276,352,944 keys/sec]
[May 08 20:01:22 UTC] RC5-72: using core #5 (CUDA 2-pipe 256-thd).
[May 08 20:01:42 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #5 (CUDA 2-pipe 256-thd)
                      0.00:00:16.66 [279,636,065 keys/sec]
[May 08 20:01:42 UTC] RC5-72: using core #6 (CUDA 4-pipe 64-thd).
[May 08 20:02:00 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #6 (CUDA 4-pipe 64-thd)
                      0.00:00:16.27 [271,926,870 keys/sec]
[May 08 20:02:00 UTC] RC5-72: using core #7 (CUDA 4-pipe 128-thd).
[May 08 20:02:19 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #7 (CUDA 4-pipe 128-thd)
                      0.00:00:15.97 [279,151,098 keys/sec]
[May 08 20:02:19 UTC] RC5-72: using core #8 (CUDA 4-pipe 256-thd).
[May 08 20:02:38 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #8 (CUDA 4-pipe 256-thd)
                      0.00:00:16.17 [287,450,082 keys/sec]
[May 08 20:02:38 UTC] RC5-72: using core #9 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd busy wait).
[May 08 20:02:50 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #9 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd busy wait)
                      0.00:00:08.98 [482,568,096 keys/sec]
[May 08 20:02:50 UTC] RC5-72: using core #10 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd sleep 100us).
[May 08 20:03:08 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #10 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd sleep 100us)
                      0.00:00:15.49 [279,471,354 keys/sec]
[May 08 20:03:08 UTC] RC5-72: using core #11 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd sleep dynamic).
[May 08 20:03:19 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #11 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd sleep dynamic)
                      0.00:00:08.98 [480,847,615 keys/sec]
[May 08 20:03:19 UTC] RC5-72 benchmark summary :
                      Default core : #0 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd)
                      Fastest core : #0 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd)


Overclocked (the card works fine at MUCH higher speeds) to 700 MHz:


dnetc v2.9109-518-GTR-10092921 for CUDA 3.1 on Win32 (WindowsNT 6.0).

[May 08 20:03:38 UTC] nvcuda.dll Version: 8.17.12.6658
[May 08 20:03:38 UTC] RC5-72: using core #0 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd).
[May 08 20:03:49 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #0 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd)
                      0.00:00:08.72 [496,838,646 keys/sec]
[May 08 20:03:49 UTC] RC5-72: using core #1 (CUDA 1-pipe 128-thd).
[May 08 20:03:59 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #1 (CUDA 1-pipe 128-thd)
                      0.00:00:07.50 [577,351,008 keys/sec]
[May 08 20:03:59 UTC] RC5-72: using core #2 (CUDA 1-pipe 256-thd).
[May 08 20:04:14 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #2 (CUDA 1-pipe 256-thd)
                      0.00:00:12.26 [351,353,726 keys/sec]
[May 08 20:04:14 UTC] RC5-72: using core #3 (CUDA 2-pipe 64-thd).
[May 08 20:04:24 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #3 (CUDA 2-pipe 64-thd)
                      0.00:00:07.64 [573,982,213 keys/sec]
[May 08 20:04:24 UTC] RC5-72: using core #4 (CUDA 2-pipe 128-thd).
[May 08 20:04:39 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #4 (CUDA 2-pipe 128-thd)
                      0.00:00:11.24 [390,686,746 keys/sec]
[May 08 20:04:39 UTC] RC5-72: using core #5 (CUDA 2-pipe 256-thd).
[May 08 20:04:55 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #5 (CUDA 2-pipe 256-thd)
                      0.00:00:13.85 [336,736,012 keys/sec]
[May 08 20:04:55 UTC] RC5-72: using core #6 (CUDA 4-pipe 64-thd).
[May 08 20:05:10 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #6 (CUDA 4-pipe 64-thd)
                      0.00:00:11.87 [386,138,010 keys/sec]
[May 08 20:05:10 UTC] RC5-72: using core #7 (CUDA 4-pipe 128-thd).
[May 08 20:05:25 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #7 (CUDA 4-pipe 128-thd)
                      0.00:00:13.05 [330,056,350 keys/sec]
[May 08 20:05:25 UTC] RC5-72: using core #8 (CUDA 4-pipe 256-thd).
[May 08 20:05:43 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #8 (CUDA 4-pipe 256-thd)
                      0.00:00:13.94 [324,903,932 keys/sec]
[May 08 20:05:43 UTC] RC5-72: using core #9 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd busy wait).
[May 08 20:05:53 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #9 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd busy wait)
                      0.00:00:07.91 [555,824,000 keys/sec]
[May 08 20:05:53 UTC] RC5-72: using core #10 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd sleep 100us).
[May 08 20:06:11 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #10 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd sleep 100us)
                      0.00:00:15.55 [279,783,119 keys/sec]
[May 08 20:06:11 UTC] RC5-72: using core #11 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd sleep dynamic).
[May 08 20:06:21 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #11 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd sleep dynamic)
                      0.00:00:07.84 [550,046,661 keys/sec]
[May 08 20:06:21 UTC] RC5-72 benchmark summary :
                      Default core : #0 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd)
                      Fastest core : #1 (CUDA 1-pipe 128-thd)
[May 08 20:06:21 UTC] Core #1 is significantly faster than the default core.
                      The GPU core selection has been made as a tradeoff between core speed
                      and responsiveness of the graphical desktop.
                      Please file a bug report along with the output of -cpuinfo
                      only if the the faster core selection does not degrade graphics performance.


Hint compare the performance of Core #1 and Core #3 at stock clocks / when overclocked. More than 100% performance increase with 15% higher clocks? By the way: The app should be recompiled with the 3.2 SDK. On several occasions CUDA apps compiled with the 3.1 SDK didn't work correctly: For example PrimeGrid's tpsieve refuses to find a single factor (on a test range with 173 factors) and runs 50% slower when compiled with the SDK 3.1 for Linux.
10) Questions and Answers : Windows : CUDA app 1.01 crashes when a core is manually selected (Message 169)
Posted 8 May 2011 by Microcruncher*
Post:
1. I selected a core manually (#9) and the CUDA app crashed.
2. I crunched with the default -1 setting (autoselect) and everything worked.
3. I selected core #10 and the CUDA app crashed.


hi ralf.. ;)


this usually happens when a WU is restarted after changeing somthing - the next one should do fine..

Hi!

Just tested it. Result: It does not work.
11) Questions and Answers : Windows : CUDA app 1.01 crashes when a core is manually selected (Message 167)
Posted 8 May 2011 by Microcruncher*
Post:
1. I manually selected a core #9) and the CUDA app crashed.
2. The app crunched with the default -1 setting (autoselect) and everything worked.
3. I selected core #10 and the CUDA app crashed.

Here is the output from the first crash:

<core_client_version>6.10.60</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<message>
 - exit code 195 (0xc3)
</message>
<stderr_txt>
19:03:59 (4048): wrapper: starting
19:03:59 (4048): device: GeForce GTX 470 (driver version 26658, CUDA version 3020, compute capability 2.0, 1248MB, 1344 GFLOPS peak)
19:03:59 (4048): checkpoint interval: 39 min (task 2800000 GFLOPS, 35 min)
19:03:59 (4048): wrapper: running dnetc518-win32-x86-cuda31.exe (-ini dnetc.ini -runoffline -multiok=1) - attempt 1/10
19:04:00 (4048): input buffer 7 packets (1264 bytes), checkpoint file 0 packets (0 bytes), output buffer 0 packets (0 bytes)
19:04:00 (4048): premature exit detected, app exit status: 0x0
19:04:00 (4048): wrapper: running dnetc518-win32-x86-cuda31.exe (-ini dnetc.ini -runoffline -multiok=1) - attempt 2/10
19:04:01 (4048): input buffer 7 packets (1264 bytes), checkpoint file 0 packets (0 bytes), output buffer 0 packets (0 bytes)
19:04:01 (4048): premature exit detected, app exit status: 0x0
19:04:01 (4048): no progress detected during last retry
19:04:01 (4048): wrapper: running dnetc518-win32-x86-cuda31.exe (-ini dnetc.ini -runoffline -multiok=1) - attempt 3/10
19:04:02 (4048): input buffer 7 packets (1264 bytes), checkpoint file 0 packets (0 bytes), output buffer 0 packets (0 bytes)
19:04:02 (4048): premature exit detected, app exit status: 0x0
19:04:02 (4048): no progress detected during last retry
19:04:02 (4048): wrapper: running dnetc518-win32-x86-cuda31.exe (-ini dnetc.ini -runoffline -multiok=1) - attempt 4/10
19:04:03 (4048): input buffer 7 packets (1264 bytes), checkpoint file 0 packets (0 bytes), output buffer 0 packets (0 bytes)
19:04:03 (4048): premature exit detected, app exit status: 0x0
19:04:03 (4048): no progress detected during last retry
19:04:03 (4048): wrapper: running dnetc518-win32-x86-cuda31.exe (-ini dnetc.ini -runoffline -multiok=1) - attempt 5/10
19:04:04 (4048): input buffer 7 packets (1264 bytes), checkpoint file 0 packets (0 bytes), output buffer 0 packets (0 bytes)
19:04:04 (4048): premature exit detected, app exit status: 0x0
19:04:04 (4048): no progress detected during last retry
19:04:04 (4048): wrapper: running dnetc518-win32-x86-cuda31.exe (-ini dnetc.ini -runoffline -multiok=1) - attempt 6/10
19:04:05 (4048): input buffer 7 packets (1264 bytes), checkpoint file 0 packets (0 bytes), output buffer 0 packets (0 bytes)
19:04:05 (4048): premature exit detected, app exit status: 0x0
19:04:05 (4048): no progress detected during last retry
19:04:05 (4048): wrapper: running dnetc518-win32-x86-cuda31.exe (-ini dnetc.ini -runoffline -multiok=1) - attempt 7/10
19:04:06 (4048): input buffer 7 packets (1264 bytes), checkpoint file 0 packets (0 bytes), output buffer 0 packets (0 bytes)
19:04:06 (4048): premature exit detected, app exit status: 0x0
19:04:06 (4048): no progress detected during last retry
19:04:06 (4048): wrapper: running dnetc518-win32-x86-cuda31.exe (-ini dnetc.ini -runoffline -multiok=1) - attempt 8/10
19:04:07 (4048): input buffer 7 packets (1264 bytes), checkpoint file 0 packets (0 bytes), output buffer 0 packets (0 bytes)
19:04:07 (4048): premature exit detected, app exit status: 0x0
19:04:07 (4048): no progress detected during last retry
19:04:07 (4048): wrapper: running dnetc518-win32-x86-cuda31.exe (-ini dnetc.ini -runoffline -multiok=1) - attempt 9/10
19:04:08 (4048): input buffer 7 packets (1264 bytes), checkpoint file 0 packets (0 bytes), output buffer 0 packets (0 bytes)
19:04:08 (4048): premature exit detected, app exit status: 0x0
19:04:08 (4048): no progress detected during last retry
19:04:08 (4048): wrapper: running dnetc518-win32-x86-cuda31.exe (-ini dnetc.ini -runoffline -multiok=1) - attempt 10/10
19:04:09 (4048): input buffer 7 packets (1264 bytes), checkpoint file 0 packets (0 bytes), output buffer 0 packets (0 bytes)
19:04:09 (4048): premature exit detected, app exit status: 0x0
19:04:09 (4048): no progress detected during last retry
19:04:09 (4048): too many retries (max 10), cancelling
19:04:09 (4048): called boinc_finish

</stderr_txt>
]]>




 
Copyright © 2011-2024 Moo! Wrapper Project