The test with 1.61 is finished for 26026433. I had one mismatch which was not reproducible, and it was NOT on the same place as Jerry got it. After restoring the checkpoint and rerun, everything went fine. So, too much overclock, or heat, or bad memory, or cosmic rays, whatever caused it first time, it did not cause it again.

I lowered the clock to factory default and begun testing v1.63 on the same expo, gtx580. Up to now running stable, all partial residue matching. I love -s switch, I would love it more if I could specify (or have builtin hardcoded, no special need to change) a [B]subfolder[/B], see the idea in my former post with the "backup" folder. That is because usually I have many other things on the cudalucas folder, and all sXXXX files are flooding it, making difficult the periodical maintenance (deleting, etc). Putting them all in a "backup" subfolder would be great.

edit ps: I am using 4.1/2.0 from jerry's build

Ver 1.64
1)Make backup dir.
2)Add all iteration round off err check option.
when err > 0.48 exit.
performace 2% down.
[code]
$ ./CUDALucas
Usage: ./CUDALucas [-d device_number] [-c checkpoint_iteration] [-f fft_length] [-s] [-t] -r|exponent|input_filename
-f set fft length
-s save all checkpoint files
-t check round off error all iterations,when err > 0.49 exit
$ ./CUDALucas -s 24036583
DEVICE:0------------------------
name GeForce GTX 460
~~~

start M24036583 fft length = 1310720
Iteration 10000 M( 24036583 )C, 0xcbdef38a0bdc4f00, n = 1310720, CUDALucas v1.64 (1:00 real, 5.9464 ms/iter, ETA 39:40:31)
^C caught. Writing checkpoint.
$ ls backup/
s24036583.10001 s24036583.11377
4$ ./CUDALucas -t 24036583
DEVICE:0------------------------
name GeForce GTX 460
~~~

start M24036583 fft length = 1310720
Iteration 10000 M( 24036583 )C, 0xcbdef38a0bdc4f00, n = 1310720, CUDALucas v1.64 (1:01 real, 6.0964 ms/iter, ETA 40:40:36)
[/code]

Got mismatch with 1.58 but had several err/increasing messages. Could be bad handling of that...

1.64 Binaries
 

[QUOTE=msft;291688]Ver 1.64
1)Make backup dir.
2)Add all iteration round off err check option.
when err > 0.48 exit.
performace 2% down.
[code]
$ ./CUDALucas
Usage: ./CUDALucas [-d device_number] [-c checkpoint_iteration] [-f fft_length] [-s] [-t] -r|exponent|input_filename
-f set fft length
-s save all checkpoint files
-t check round off error all iterations,when err > 0.49 exit
$ ./CUDALucas -s 24036583
DEVICE:0------------------------
name GeForce GTX 460
~~~

start M24036583 fft length = 1310720
Iteration 10000 M( 24036583 )C, 0xcbdef38a0bdc4f00, n = 1310720, CUDALucas v1.64 (1:00 real, 5.9464 ms/iter, ETA 39:40:31)
^C caught. Writing checkpoint.
$ ls backup/
s24036583.10001 s24036583.11377
4$ ./CUDALucas -t 24036583
DEVICE:0------------------------
name GeForce GTX 460
~~~

start M24036583 fft length = 1310720
Iteration 10000 M( 24036583 )C, 0xcbdef38a0bdc4f00, n = 1310720, CUDALucas v1.64 (1:01 real, 6.0964 ms/iter, ETA 40:40:36)
[/code][/QUOTE]

Attached v1.64 x64 binaries (untested):[LIST][*]CUDA 4.0 / SM 2.0[*]CUDA 4.1 / SM 2.0[*]CUDA 4.1 / SM 2.1[/LIST]

[QUOTE=apsen;267365]I figured it out (kind of). When restarting from checkpoint and finishing the test it will then try to read more input from the same file although it has already been closed. It will loop endlessly until it crashes (haven't really figured out the exact point and reason for crash but it happens in "input" function when it enters endless loop).

As I tried to figure it out I have cut out a lot of unused code, removed K&R style prototypes, etc. Also added some timing output. I haven't touched anything related to calculations but it would be prudent to be cautious - it needs a lot of testing before production use. Most likely bugs would be in parsing command line. That code suffered most nontrivial change.

I'm attaching the modified source code with Win64 executable compiled for sm_13.[/QUOTE]

aspen/msft,

1.2b was the last build that included a win32 makefile. I modified my current makefile for win32, but it does not compile. Lots of errors during nvcc processing CUDALucas.cu. Has 32 bit compatability been removed or do I need some extra includes?

Edit: I included the screen output with the errors.

Thanks.

[QUOTE=flashjh;291706]aspen/msft,

1.2b was the last build that included a win32 makefile. I modified my current makefile for win32, but it does not compile. Lots of errors during nvcc processing CUDALucas.cu. Has 32 bit compatability been removed or do I need some extra includes?

Edit: I included the screen output with the errors.[/QUOTE]

From the looks of things, all those errors can be tied back to the lack of definition of "BOOL" which I'm assuming is a pre-processor macro. (searching the internet...) on windows, you should probably "#include <WinDef.h>" at some point. I cannot confirm this due to a lack of a windows environment.

[QUOTE=aaronhaviland;291712]From the looks of things, all those errors can be tied back to the lack of definition of "BOOL" which I'm assuming is a pre-processor macro. (searching the internet...) on windows, you should probably "#include <WinDef.h>" at some point. I cannot confirm this due to a lack of a windows environment.[/QUOTE]

Thanks! I'll take a look.

[QUOTE=flashjh;291713]Thanks! I'll take a look.[/QUOTE]

Since taking a look at CUDALucas.cu, the file was edited since the last win32 build, some changes need to be made-any help is appreciated. I'll edit it later.

[QUOTE=apsen;291701]Got mismatch with 1.58 but had several err/increasing messages. Could be bad handling of that...[/QUOTE]
[code]
err = 0.371603, increasing n from 1572864
continuing work from a partial result
err = 0.371603, increasing n from 1572864
continuing work from a partial result
err = 0.371603, increasing n from 1572864
continuing work from a partial result
err = 0.371603, increasing n from 1572864
continuing work from a partial result
Iteration 27390000 M( 29198173 )C, 0x0ae3a28bd9f1003c, n = 1572864, CUDALucas v1.58 (1:29 real, 8.9455 ms/iter, ETA 4:28:21)
[/code]
Interesting.
Why exit infinity loop ?

What version is this?[code]bill@Gravemind:~/CUDALucas∰∂ CUDALucas -v
CUDALucas version information:
$Id: MacLucasFFTW.c,v 8.1 2007/06/23 22:33:35 wedgingt Exp $ wedgingt@acm.org
^C^C

^C[/code]Note that ^C doesn't have an effect. The tarball in the directory says 1.3.

[QUOTE=Dubslow;291775]What version is this?[code]bill@Gravemind:~/CUDALucas∰∂ CUDALucas -v
CUDALucas version information:
$Id: MacLucasFFTW.c,v 8.1 2007/06/23 22:33:35 wedgingt Exp $ wedgingt@acm.org
^C^C

^C[/code]Note that ^C doesn't have an effect. The tarball in the directory says 1.3.[/QUOTE]

^C works on newer versions :smile: