1 2018-06-05 00:29:52	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke opened pull request #13395: rpc: Avoid "duplicate" return value for invalid submitblock (06master...06Mf1806-rpcMiningSubmitblock) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13395
  2 2018-06-05 02:37:11	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15glaksmono closed pull request #13322: Fixing texts in the "encrypt wallet" GUI process (06master...06bitcoin-gui-13245) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13322
  3 2018-06-05 09:17:03	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15Empact opened pull request #13396: Drop unused uint 256 not operator (06master...06drop-bool-not) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13396
  4 2018-06-05 11:59:20	0|skeees|just a quick post that #12934 which we discussed at the IRC meeting a few weeks ago (https://bitcoincore.org/en/meetings/2018/05/03/) is now in a reviewable state
  5 2018-06-05 11:59:23	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12934 | [net] [validation] Call ProcessNewBlock() asynchronously by skeees · Pull Request #12934 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
  6 2018-06-05 13:48:41	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14989c899 15Giulio Lombardo: Rename “OS X” to the newer “macOS” convention
  7 2018-06-05 13:48:41	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/0de7cc848e07...861de3b518ad
  8 2018-06-05 13:48:42	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14861de3b 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #13366: Docs: Rename “OS X” to the newer “macOS” convention...
  9 2018-06-05 13:49:42	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #13366: Docs: Rename “OS X” to the newer “macOS” convention (06master...06osx-renaming) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13366
 10 2018-06-05 14:30:37	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1481bbd32 15practicalswift: build: Guard against accidental introduction of new Boost dependencies
 11 2018-06-05 14:30:37	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/861de3b518ad...7c7508c268fa
 12 2018-06-05 14:30:38	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 147c7508c 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #13385: build: Guard against accidental introduction of new Boost dependencies...
 13 2018-06-05 14:31:37	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #13385: build: Guard against accidental introduction of new Boost dependencies (06master...06lint-boost) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13385
 14 2018-06-05 14:33:26	0|Roybent|#worldchat
 15 2018-06-05 14:49:30	0|provoostenator|While trying to get bitcoind to run on one the many *-pi's out there, I wondered: has anyone ever tried to design a system on chip that's optimal for this?
 16 2018-06-05 14:50:12	0|echeveria|provoostenator: the optimal processor is anything other than a raspberry pi. lets take this to #bitcoin.
 17 2018-06-05 15:24:48	0|Roybent|Invitation Age of sail at #AdventuresofChat
 18 2018-06-05 15:41:19	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14fa36aa7 15MarcoFalke: wallet: Prevent segfault when sending to unspendable witness
 19 2018-06-05 15:41:19	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/7c7508c268fa...2140f6cbc5e9
 20 2018-06-05 15:41:20	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 142140f6c 15MarcoFalke: Merge #13351: wallet: Prevent segfault when sending to unspendable witness...
 21 2018-06-05 15:42:09	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke closed pull request #13351: wallet: Prevent segfault when sending to unspendable witness (06master...06Mf1806-walletUnspendableWitnessIsMine) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13351
 22 2018-06-05 15:44:13	0|Roybent|Invitation Age of sail at #AdventuresofChat
 23 2018-06-05 15:51:02	0|wumpus|provoostenator: you mean secp256k1 specific instructions? people have been thingking about it, could be done on a FPGA, but I don't think it's ever been done
 24 2018-06-05 15:53:03	0|provoostenator|echeveria seems to believe sha256 is the bottleneck (see #bitcoin), but also that anything outside the CPU would be too slow I/O to be worh it.
 25 2018-06-05 15:54:17	0|echeveria|I looked at the Zynq combination FPGA / ARM devices a long time ago and came to the conclusion that the copy time even on the shared memory bus between the two chips would make it non viable. I'd enjoy being proved wrong though.
 26 2018-06-05 15:54:39	0|Roybent|Invitation Age of sail at #AdventuresofChat
 27 2018-06-05 15:59:36	0|sipa|Roybent: not here
 28 2018-06-05 16:03:12	0|wumpus|provoostenator: well sha256 extension instructions exist for ARM (supported on newer SoCs), I intend to add support for them at some point. But I would be surprised if that is the biggest bottleneck in validation.
 29 2018-06-05 16:04:03	0|wumpus|echeveria: yes, if there is high-bandwidth communication between two chpis that tends to dominate. I was thinking of, say, RiscV extensions for secp256k1 validation so it's in-core.
 30 2018-06-05 16:04:29	0|wumpus|for ARM it's somewhat unlikely at this time
 31 2018-06-05 16:06:31	0|sipa|secp256k1 validation only needs 6 Mbyte/s or so bandwidth to be faster than regular cpu cores
 32 2018-06-05 16:07:42	0|wumpus|even an USB2.0 secp256k1 dongle would work then
 33 2018-06-05 16:10:14	0|provoostenator|Many of these boards have DDR2-SODIMM sockets that you stick something into...
 34 2018-06-05 16:10:26	0|echeveria|my conclusion was that it would take longer to copy than to do it on the CPU
 35 2018-06-05 16:12:46	0|echeveria|perhaps that's not true.
 36 2018-06-05 16:13:07	0|echeveria|I wasn't able to find any research on doing ECDSA on a FPGA that looked promising though
 37 2018-06-05 16:13:12	0|wumpus|M.2 expansion slots are also becoming quite common (though there are lots of different "keys" which makes it unclear what is uncompatible, but some of them include PCI-e lanes)
 38 2018-06-05 16:14:01	0|provoostenator|Well, I just got my Nanopi Neo Plus 2, an Orange Pi Plus 2E is underway, as well as the octacore Khadas VIM2 Max... so if anyone needs something benchmarked.
 39 2018-06-05 16:14:20	0|echeveria|secp256k1's benchmark will say "slow"
 40 2018-06-05 16:15:06	0|wumpus|echeveria: I could find some research on that, but for specific curves this is not something that tends to exist as open source :)
 41 2018-06-05 16:15:12	0|provoostenator|At least they have wifi support, so I can put them in the freezer to keep the CPU's from downclocking :-)
 42 2018-06-05 16:15:35	0|echeveria|wumpus: for non specific curves the research presented speeds slower than a small ARM core sadly
 43 2018-06-05 16:18:20	0|wumpus|echeveria: right - the hardware would really need to be optimized for a specific properties, otherwise it's not going to help compared to just a sw implementation
 44 2018-06-05 16:20:31	0|wumpus|echeveria: the secp256k1 library isn't easy to compete against I suppose
 45 2018-06-05 17:05:38	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/2140f6cbc5e9...f0fd39f37630
 46 2018-06-05 17:05:39	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 146aa33fe 15Ben Woosley: Drop UpdateTransaction in favor of UpdateInput...
 47 2018-06-05 17:05:39	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14f0fd39f 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #13269: refactoring: Drop UpdateTransaction in favor of UpdateInput...
 48 2018-06-05 17:06:28	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #13269: refactoring: Drop UpdateTransaction in favor of UpdateInput (06master...06update-transaction) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13269
 49 2018-06-05 17:06:41	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke opened pull request #13399: rpc: Add submitblockheader (06master...06Mf1806-rpcBlockHeader) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13399
 50 2018-06-05 17:31:25	0|sipa|cfields: going to PR that SSE4 speedup?
 51 2018-06-05 17:36:27	0|sipa|gmaxwell: the 4-way code is actually SSE4, not SSSE3
 52 2018-06-05 17:36:31	0|sipa|(it uses pinsrd)
 53 2018-06-05 17:42:53	0|sipa|gmaxwell: i think that could be avoided, though if really desired
 54 2018-06-05 17:56:51	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14fa4760f 15MarcoFalke: qa: Increase includeconf test coverage
 55 2018-06-05 17:56:51	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/f0fd39f37630...264efdca74f2
 56 2018-06-05 17:56:52	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14264efdc 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #13367: qa: Increase includeconf test coverage...
 57 2018-06-05 17:57:51	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #13367: qa: Increase includeconf test coverage (06master...06Mf1806-qaIncludeconf) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13367
 58 2018-06-05 18:04:04	0|promag|sipa: have you shared the benchmark code mentioned in #13386?
 59 2018-06-05 18:04:06	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13386 | SHA256 implementations based on Intel SHA Extensions by sipa · Pull Request #13386 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 60 2018-06-05 18:04:57	0|Silva|Hello !
 61 2018-06-05 18:05:34	0|Silva|Does Bitcoin implements Multi Signature?
 62 2018-06-05 18:07:52	0|sipa|promag: bench/bench_bitcoin
 63 2018-06-05 18:09:33	0|promag|sipa +1
 64 2018-06-05 18:10:40	0|sipa|Silva: https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com
 65 2018-06-05 18:12:51	0|Silva|sipa, the bench implements mult_sig ?
 66 2018-06-05 18:13:37	0|sipa|Silva: not here, this channel is for development
 67 2018-06-05 18:14:27	0|Silva|actually I would like to know where in the code is this implementation for Multisig ?
 68 2018-06-05 18:14:29	0|sipa|Silva: if you have general questions about how bitcoin works, see the #bitcoin irc channel, the developer documentation on https://bitcoin.org/en/developer-documentation, or ask on https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com
 69 2018-06-05 18:14:40	0|sipa|Silva: that's not something i can answer in 3 sentences
 70 2018-06-05 18:21:46	0|reca|hello why this issue is locked: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13387 ?
 71 2018-06-05 18:27:47	0|cfields|sipa: sure. I spent some time trying to understand why it didn't apply to the avx2 path, and poking at intel's other suggested optims
 72 2018-06-05 18:29:21	0|sipa|cfields: let me know if you have more things to benchmark
 73 2018-06-05 18:30:21	0|cfields|sipa: thanks, but I think it's a bit too far out of my wheelhouse. If you're comfortable with the speedup being generic and expected, I'll just PR as-is.
 74 2018-06-05 18:30:52	0|phantomcircuit|reca, it says in the issue why it's locked
 75 2018-06-05 18:34:00	0|reca|phantomcircuit: could you copy/paste here the exact resason pls because seriously I don't see it and in general I don't understand why you closed it
 76 2018-06-05 18:35:50	0|cfields|sipa: in particular, I'm not understanding why Round() operates on 128/256bit vectors rather than uint32_t's? Is it just the cost of moving them in/out of the larger registers?
 77 2018-06-05 18:36:06	0|sipa|cfields: hmm?
 78 2018-06-05 18:36:41	0|sipa|cfields: the __m128i act like 4 parallel 32 bit integers
 79 2018-06-05 18:37:08	0|sipa|so 'Add' does 4 additions in parallel, Xor does 4 parallel xors in parallel, ...
 80 2018-06-05 18:38:00	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14ebec731 15Ben Woosley: Drop the chain argument to GetDifficulty...
 81 2018-06-05 18:38:00	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/264efdca74f2...a589f536b5e1
 82 2018-06-05 18:38:01	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14a589f53 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #13288: rpc: Remove the need to include rpc/blockchain.cpp in order to put `GetDifficulty` under test...
 83 2018-06-05 18:38:29	0|sipa|cfields: operating on uint32's would lose the SIMD speedup
 84 2018-06-05 18:38:45	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #13288: rpc: Remove the need to include rpc/blockchain.cpp in order to put `GetDifficulty` under test (06master...06get-difficulty) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13288
 85 2018-06-05 18:38:54	0|reca|sipa: where are this official git mirrors of the bitcoin core ?
 86 2018-06-05 18:39:00	0|sipa|reca: git clone
 87 2018-06-05 18:39:03	0|cfields|sipa: yes, I understand that. It just doesn't look how I would expect.
 88 2018-06-05 18:39:24	0|sipa|reca: there is no urgent issue; we can have a discussion about alternatives, but the ownership of github doesn't affect us
 89 2018-06-05 18:39:41	0|sipa|reca: if microsoft would start making invasive changes to the platform, then of course that changes
 90 2018-06-05 18:40:10	0|sipa|reca: as explained in the issue, we don't actually rely on github for maintaining the integrity of the code
 91 2018-06-05 18:40:56	0|sipa|cfields: what would you expect?
 92 2018-06-05 18:41:26	0|reca|sipa: for me it doesn't really matter who owns Github the problem is that this tool is not open-source
 93 2018-06-05 18:41:37	0|wumpus|I'd like to invite Empact (Ben Woosley) and ken281222 (Chun Lee) to the organizations, as they've been contributing very actively, everyone agree?
 94 2018-06-05 18:41:52	0|achow101|wumpus: ack
 95 2018-06-05 18:41:55	0|sipa|wumpus: ack
 96 2018-06-05 18:41:56	0|cfields|ack
 97 2018-06-05 18:42:09	0|sipa|reca: that's a fair point, but not an urgent issue
 98 2018-06-05 18:42:18	0|wumpus|thanks
 99 2018-06-05 18:43:20	0|wumpus|reca: I just started a mirror on a Tor hidden service FWIW
100 2018-06-05 18:44:28	0|reca|sipa: maybe it's no an urgent issue but it would be nice to have some official git mirrors as a reference to Github
101 2018-06-05 18:44:35	0|sipa|reca: i agree!
102 2018-06-05 18:44:37	0|wumpus|reca: http://nxshomzlgqmwfwhcnyvbznyrybh3gotlfgis7wkv7iur2yj2rarlhiad.onion/
103 2018-06-05 18:44:51	0|reca|wumpus: thx
104 2018-06-05 18:45:02	0|phantomcircuit|wumpus, why is that so long? new .onion format?
105 2018-06-05 18:45:21	0|wumpus|phantomcircuit: yes, v3 have longer pubkeys
106 2018-06-05 18:45:44	0|sipa|ed25519, right?
107 2018-06-05 18:45:58	0|cfields|sipa: not sure, I suppose
108 2018-06-05 18:46:17	0|sipa|cfields: do you see the semantics of each of the helper functions at the beginning of the file?
109 2018-06-05 18:46:19	0|wumpus|phantomcircuit: https://gist.github.com/laanwj/4fe8470881d7b9499eedc48dc9ef1ad1#Appendix_B_Tor_v3_address_encoding
110 2018-06-05 18:46:23	0|wumpus|sipa: indeed!
111 2018-06-05 18:47:25	0|cfields|sipa: sure, I see how those operate on multiple values.
112 2018-06-05 18:47:45	0|sipa|cfields: same for Round :)
113 2018-06-05 18:48:13	0|sipa|each of the a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h variables contains 1/8th of the state for each of the 4 hashes being computed
114 2018-06-05 18:48:25	0|cfields|sipa: I just don't see where distinct values are actually loaded, other than wX.
115 2018-06-05 18:48:40	0|sipa|Read4
116 2018-06-05 18:49:08	0|sipa|it returns a 128-bit value which contains 32 bits from each of the 4 input blobs
117 2018-06-05 18:49:48	0|sipa|the w0...w16 variables are a moving window of the last 16 round constants
118 2018-06-05 18:49:56	0|sipa|which are the expanded form of the input
119 2018-06-05 18:51:08	0|cfields|sipa: aha, there it is. Yes, I was misunderstanding. Thank you.
120 2018-06-05 18:52:07	0|cfields|sipa: I kept getting caught up on the fact that it looks like Sigma0/Sigma1 could be computed in-parallel for 3 or 4 values at a time.
121 2018-06-05 18:52:35	0|sipa|yup, and it is :)
122 2018-06-05 18:52:40	0|cfields|so I was expected the loads to be more local that way
123 2018-06-05 18:57:10	0|gmaxwell|sipa: I don't think anyone cares much about SSSE3 vs SSE4 support.
124 2018-06-05 18:57:17	0|sipa|gmaxwell: okay!
125 2018-06-05 19:05:42	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15theuni opened pull request #13400: sha256: small speedup for sse4 path. (06master...06sha2-avx1) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13400
126 2018-06-05 19:06:26	0|gmaxwell|sipa: ^ you should see if thats a speedup on ryzen. :P
127 2018-06-05 19:06:53	0|sipa|gmaxwell: good idea!
128 2018-06-05 19:07:16	0|cfields|sipa: I thought that's what your 5% number was?
129 2018-06-05 19:07:25	0|sipa|gmaxwell: actually, that's totally irrelevant, as AVX2 will be used there
130 2018-06-05 19:08:12	0|sipa|the benchmark was just a way to spot check that cfields' benchmark wasn't too specific for his system
131 2018-06-05 19:08:49	0|sipa|but i can test there too
132 2018-06-05 19:09:06	0|gmaxwell|Yes, sure but it would be interesting. If its slower on ryzen it's probably also slower on other AMD that doesn't have avx2.
133 2018-06-05 19:16:01	0|sipa|gmaxwell, cfields: ugh, 10% slower on Ryzen
134 2018-06-05 19:16:37	0|gmaxwell|lol.
135 2018-06-05 19:16:39	0|cfields|sigh
136 2018-06-05 19:16:50	0|sipa|sense, it makes none.
137 2018-06-05 19:16:53	0|gmaxwell|I think wumpus has some pre-ryzen amd stuff?
138 2018-06-05 19:16:56	0|sipa|but cpu scheduling is complicated
139 2018-06-05 19:18:58	0|wumpus|yep
140 2018-06-05 19:19:11	0|sipa|wumpus: does it have AVX2?
141 2018-06-05 19:19:42	0|sipa|("avx2" in /proc/cpuingo)
142 2018-06-05 19:20:17	0|wumpus|AMD A9-9420
143 2018-06-05 19:20:19	0|wumpus|oh let me see
144 2018-06-05 19:20:42	0|wumpus|sipa: it does
145 2018-06-05 19:20:46	0|sipa|wumpus: dang :)
146 2018-06-05 19:21:39	0|wumpus|I have two other AMD systems I can check though
147 2018-06-05 19:22:09	0|sipa|wumpus: ideally we find an SSE4 capable system that does not have AVX2
148 2018-06-05 19:22:22	0|sipa|("sse4_1" in /proc/cpuinfo)
149 2018-06-05 19:22:58	0|wumpus|this is a "AMD FX-8370" with only "avx" (also  sse4_1 sse4_2)
150 2018-06-05 19:23:34	0|sipa|cool! can you benchmark bench_bitcoin -filter=".*SHA256D64.*" there before and after #13400 ?
151 2018-06-05 19:23:36	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13400 | sha256: small speedup for sse4 path. by theuni · Pull Request #13400 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
152 2018-06-05 19:24:05	0|wumpus|also an even older one, but that doesn't have sse4_x
153 2018-06-05 19:24:06	0|wumpus|sure
154 2018-06-05 19:24:09	0|sipa|thanks!
155 2018-06-05 19:24:39	0|cfields|woohoo, thanks wumpus!
156 2018-06-05 19:51:55	0|wumpus|cfields: sipa: about 25% slower with #13400 https://0bin.net/paste/P1dcff3jykaU7h6p#KjX2cwzdyI8KyExoUEgxfCSyXtspgYnIkH7nUJRND-W
157 2018-06-05 19:51:58	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13400 | sha256: small speedup for sse4 path. by theuni · Pull Request #13400 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
158 2018-06-05 19:52:06	0|cfields|whoa
159 2018-06-05 19:53:12	0|cfields|ok, closing. Not worth playing that game.
160 2018-06-05 19:54:00	0|wumpus|sorry
161 2018-06-05 19:55:35	0|cfields|no worries. It was a cheap/easy boost, but not enough to miss.
162 2018-06-05 19:56:01	0|wumpus|just repeated the test, same result, kind of counter-intuitive, but yes it's how these things go
163 2018-06-05 19:56:50	0|cfields|uhmm, whoa...
164 2018-06-05 19:57:15	0|cfields|wumpus: mind testing one more time, adding -mavx to SSE41_CXXFLAGS ?
165 2018-06-05 19:58:42	0|wumpus|yes, will try
166 2018-06-05 19:58:59	0|wumpus|with the patch or both with and without?
167 2018-06-05 20:00:43	0|cfields|I just tested with, and got a ~65% speedup. Haven't tested without yet.
168 2018-06-05 20:00:51	0|cfields|(also haven't investigated where it comes from yet)
169 2018-06-05 20:01:44	0|sipa|cfields: whoa!
170 2018-06-05 20:01:46	0|wumpus|will try both then
171 2018-06-05 20:02:02	0|sipa|should we provide an sse4+avx implementation (just the same code with mavx enabled)?
172 2018-06-05 20:03:29	0|cfields|sipa: if that's reproducible, I'd say that's justifiable. I'm assuming it's pebcak for now though :)
173 2018-06-05 20:03:39	0|gmaxwell|that seems bonkers
174 2018-06-05 20:04:18	0|sipa|AVX adds 256-bit registers
175 2018-06-05 20:04:34	0|sipa|which perhaps the compiler uses as extra register space (instead of spilling to stack)
176 2018-06-05 20:09:39	0|wumpus|cfields: this has the results added with -mavx - https://0bin.net/paste/ReThQTAAWhKYfH7x#K99wDsZBBbtqEnc1N44e9UWz2E-t1y2jDhByhD8BBZe - not much difference from before
177 2018-06-05 20:10:30	0|cfields|huh. I've repeated mine several times now.
178 2018-06-05 20:11:33	0|sipa|looking at the generated code, with -mavx -msse4, the 4-way SSE asm code uses 256-bit registers extensively
179 2018-06-05 20:12:18	0|sipa|so it's not unreasonable to expect that on some systems, its performance is affected
180 2018-06-05 20:12:19	0|cfields|sipa: do you see an improvement over master?
181 2018-06-05 20:12:27	0|sipa|haven't benchmarked yet
182 2018-06-05 20:12:34	0|wumpus|cfields: well either it's due to this system, or I'm doing something wrong
183 2018-06-05 20:12:53	0|wumpus|-AX_CHECK_COMPILE_FLAG([-msse4.1],[[SSE41_CXXFLAGS="-msse4.1"]],,[[$CXXFLAG_WERROR]])
184 2018-06-05 20:12:56	0|wumpus|+AX_CHECK_COMPILE_FLAG([-msse4.1],[[SSE41_CXXFLAGS="-msse4.1 -mavx"]],,[[$CXXFLAG_WERROR]])
185 2018-06-05 20:12:59	0|wumpus|that's the correct patch?
186 2018-06-05 20:13:00	0|sipa|it's also not unreasonable that the impact of such changes is wildly different on Intel vs AMD cpus
187 2018-06-05 20:13:05	0|sipa|wumpus: yup
188 2018-06-05 20:13:47	0|cfields|wumpus: yep, didn't mean to imply that you did something wrong :)
189 2018-06-05 20:16:56	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15theuni closed pull request #13400: sha256: small speedup for sse4 path. (06master...06sha2-avx1) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13400
190 2018-06-05 20:18:56	0|wumpus|I vaguely remember earlier troubles with AVX sha256 and this particular computer
191 2018-06-05 20:19:36	0|cfields|well at least it's no worse
192 2018-06-05 20:21:11	0|wumpus|bleh, at some point you'd need to benchmark on every specific vendor and model seperately to see what is the best way
193 2018-06-05 20:31:14	0|Rebo|hi does anyone here has experience with setting up a bitcoin full node on an azure virtual machine?
194 2018-06-05 20:41:52	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15TheBlueMatt opened pull request #13402: Document validationinterace callback blocking deadlock potential. (06master...062018-05-abc-scheduler-docs) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13402
195 2018-06-05 20:45:34	0|wumpus|Rebo: better ask in #bitcoin
196 2018-06-05 20:45:47	0|Rebo|ah thank you