![]() |
![]() |
#23 |
"TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17"
Mar 2017
US midwest
2·29·127 Posts |
![]()
Perhaps this? https://mytabletguru.com/flash-dead-...android-phone/
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#24 | |
∂2ω=0
Sep 2002
República de California
5·2,351 Posts |
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#25 | |
"Composite as Heck"
Oct 2017
3·311 Posts |
![]()
After a lot of flailing about I managed to root a Samsung S7 Edge. There's a few dozen methods that mostly boil down to the same thing but it's a minefield of outdated and incompatible methods. The one I got to work was with CF-Auto-Root, YMMV:
Note that the bootloader needs to be unlocked otherwise trying to root may fail or brick the device. Quote:
Roadblocks identified so far:
FRP is the real killer as it means we can't easily hoover up bottom of the barrel spares and repairs even if we have the hardware to fix them. Notes trying to run mlucas:
There's one coming that does have a fully dead screen, it's unlikely I'll be able to fix it unfortunately. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#26 |
Undefined
"The unspeakable one"
Jun 2006
My evil lair
5·7·191 Posts |
![]()
I've no personal experience here, but I know of people that have put Linux on them. They only get SSH access from what I can tell. No fancy graphics. No dumb graphics. No graphics at all. However the ones I saw were not second hand, they were working, and the original owners knew whatever passwords may have been necessary. So, perhaps I misunderstood the process. I didn't realise they might have needed a working screen and passwords to get Linux on them.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#27 |
∂2ω=0
Sep 2002
República de California
5×2,351 Posts |
![]()
Wow, thanks for the detiled summary, M344587487 - that's a bummer re. the Factory Reset Protection, but it is what it is. Hopefully once we firm up the recipe (or set thereof) in terms of both the hardware and rootkit ingredients we'll have a better sense as to whether getting one's hands on a suitable number of eligible discard phones to build a compute farm with throughput similar to a cutting-edge Intel multicore-CPU system will be practicable.
Re. your self-tests, are you running one set with -cpu 0:3 and a second with -cpu 4:5, or what? (I assume the 4-cores-available CPU maps to cores 0-3 in proc/cpuinfo, is that right?) How long do you expect the self-tests to take? Did you stick any cooling fins on the CPUs, or are you using the phone as-is? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#28 | |||
"Composite as Heck"
Oct 2017
93310 Posts |
![]() Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Some dodgy mlucas.cfg timings, looks like the processor preference was ignored. I kept unlocking the phone to check progress which probably didn't help but unless all cores are loaded I think this is normal behaviour. I used these configs in testing but changed the timings so that it'd pick the right FFTs: mlucas.cfg -cpu 0,1,2,3 https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/rKWF8ZppBS/ mlucas.cfg -cpu 4,5 https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/hjdC9FxzPs/ /proc/cpuinfo http://paste.ubuntu.com/p/Bj5bzbJBhb/ cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpufreq/cpuinfo_cur_freq failed with permission denied even as root, but there are 8 cores there. A custom kernel may be in order. The results are always cores 0,1,2,3 first, 4,5 second: 1024k battery locked http://paste.ubuntu.com/p/8vN9fNCFvH/ 2560k battery locked http://paste.ubuntu.com/p/WNg9TqPPMS/ Where it gets weird is the 1024k test with battery charging: 1024k charging locked http://paste.ubuntu.com/p/pMw9z6fCZB/ In all three cases the two tests were started simultaneously, then the phone locked itself and wasn't unlocked until the test was stopped. The first two tests look stable. If you look at the 1024k charging timings not only are both clock timings way worse, but one of the clusters must have been turned off judging by the realtime timings. The test was also turned off at past midnight as I assumed more results were present, unknown if the tests were shelved or just executing slowly. I'm doing more testing at 1024k to try and figure out what's going on. Just tried "1024k charged locked" for an hour and no results had been spat out, both clusters should have had half a dozen by then. Now trying "1024k charged unlocked", which means plugged in at full battery with the screen forced on. It seems to be spitting out marginally better timings than "1024k battery locked" but will let it run overnight and see if the scheduler goes nuts. It seems to be warmer but it's likely mostly due to the screen being on. Tomorrow I'll see if there's a way to get more accurate config files, putting the other cluster under load may work but who knows if it'll play nice. |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#29 |
∂2ω=0
Sep 2002
República de California
5·2,351 Posts |
![]()
Thanks for the data - very interesting. I doubt there's much point in trying any -cpu 0:5 runs, we already know from e.g. testing on prototype Odroid N1 than trying to run 1 job using both the big+little CPUs kills performance ... but feel free to try a single-FFT-length self-test @1024k using all 6 cores:
./Mlucas -fftlen 1024 -iters 100 -cpu 0:5 and see what the resulting line appended to mlucas.cfg says re. timing. Some observations/questions: o Is there a way to tell if the CPUs are throttling under load? Looking at the cfg-file data, it's almost a sawtooth kind of pattern, as if at the start of the self-test the CPUs are cold and unthrottled, then after a few minutes and several FFT lengths throttling kicks in to allow things to cool off, a few minutes of that and things are cool enough to unthrottle, lather, rinse, repeat. I'm thinking maybe the phone-not-getting-very-hot-under-load is due not to fabulous heat transfer design but rather aggressive throttling-temperature settings, the kind which would make sense for a device people hold in their hands while using. That might also explain the dramatic slowdown you see during charging - even a elatively modest amount of extra heat from the charging process could result in appreciably greater CPU throttling-under-load. (Or maybe the OS is designed to reduce charging time by throttling CPU loads, or some combination of both.) o Throttling could also explain why the 2-jobs running 'production' tests @1024k have timings so much slower than the 1024k entries in the corresponding cfg-files: e.g. @1024k we have a timing or 31ms/iter in cfg1 (-cpu 0:3) and 20 ms/iter in cfg2 (-cpu 4:5), but in your actual simultaneous svereal-checkpoint runs @1024 the -cpu 0:3 job was getting 59 msec/iter and the -cpu 4:5 job 71 msec/iter. On the Odroid N1 prototype last year the slowdown from running -cpu 0:3 and -cpu 4:5 jobs simultaneously was only in the 10-20% range. o Is there a simple way for you to increase the cooling of the CPUs? Maybe stick the phone in some kind of air stream (perhaps next to one of the case fans from an ATX-cased PC), or if you're in cool climate, outside into cold air? o Re. a custom kernel that would enable access to all 8 cores, I didn't even know such hackage is possible - what would that involve, and would one need to manually add core 6/7 entries to /proc/cpuinfo analogous to those for cores 4/5? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#30 | ||||
"Composite as Heck"
Oct 2017
16458 Posts |
![]() Quote:
Code:
1024 msec/iter = 25.18 ROE[avg,max] = [0.283482143, 0.375000000] radices = 32 16 32 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 100-iteration Res mod 2^64, 2^35-1, 2^36-1 = 77E8A2AB109EC324, 21535019539, 66963127211 Quote:
Quote:
These are better timings and stable, by leaving it unlocked the phone thinks the user is using it so it allows the CPU to stretch its legs more. It still barely gets warm and I suspect much of that is due to the screen. All testing in different states does is indirectly alter what the governor does and clearly charged and unlocked is the best so I'll stick with it for now. It's interesting that the two clusters have timings that are so close, I wonder if the jobs are constantly getting swapped between clusters averaging out the timings while also slowing things down. A 0:5 test is pending. Quote:
I don't know if it's possible I'm just spitballing, but it is sold as an 8 core SoC and we can run a custom OS and kernels so there's a possibility. It's a Samsung exclusive chip so there's no competitive downside to them restricting the SoC in software, they may restrict it for load balancing. Hopefully someone has created a custom whatever so it would just be a case of finding it and flashing it with Odin AFAIK. |
||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#31 | |
"TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17"
Mar 2017
US midwest
2·29·127 Posts |
![]() Quote:
Timings for 1024k fft length may give quick data for variable sensitivity testing. Is it your intention that these cell phone based compute farms would be used on such low fft lengths & exponents in production? If planning use near the first-test or DC wavefront, I'd like to see some longer timings for that eventually. I have quadro 2000s running tests of over a month duration, with good results, so long runs 0.1 to 0.5 years per completed result, perhaps even longer, should not be completely ruled out. Judging from http://paste.ubuntu.com/p/WNg9TqPPMS/ they may be capable of a few DC a year. I think that compares favorably to some of the older silicon space heaters I have still running, both in duration and compute/joule. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#32 |
"Composite as Heck"
Oct 2017
3A516 Posts |
![]()
I plan to do simultaneous testing at 1024K, 2560K, 4608K, 7680K and 18432K with every SBC and phone I have that uses big.LITTLE so that they can be compared (following the RK3399 testing https://www.mersenneforum.org/showpo...&postcount=177 ). I picked these to be a good spread and hitting the main lengths of interest. Having both clusters do the same FFT allows for a synthetic iteration time to be made from the combined throughput so that these SoCs can be more easily compared to traditional CPU architectures. Still figuring out the best way to go about benching, ewmayer is right that cooling makes a big difference with phones so figuring out a fair way to test is the plan today. I'm leaning towards testing different temps at 1024K to show the temp scaling, and using a standardised ambient with airflow environment to bench the different FFT lengths. When that's done I'll hunt for a lean custom kernel and/or OS that focuses on performance to see if there's something to be gained there.
Don't know what others plans are but I plan on putting some phones on DC LL, maybe first time PRP if and when. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#33 | ||
∂2ω=0
Sep 2002
República de California
5×2,351 Posts |
![]() Quote:
I'll be interested to see your "baby, it's cold outside" timings, as well. Quote:
For those of you with teenaged kids interested in such stuff, note that putting together such a cluster would make for a great science fair project. Last fiddled with by ewmayer on 2019-01-25 at 19:53 |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Official GIMPS 2019 fundraiser thread | Prime95 | GIMPS Board of Directors News | 46 | 2019-11-22 06:01 |
GIMPS wiki account request thread | ixfd64 | mersennewiki | 169 | 2018-09-21 05:43 |
Cuda and a cluster | efiGeek | Msieve | 17 | 2015-12-06 14:31 |
GPUs vs. Cellphone GSM | Rodrigo | GPU Computing | 2 | 2011-07-14 07:48 |
Cluster @ MSRC | smh | NFSNET Discussion | 1 | 2003-08-12 08:52 |