Quote from: sky59sky59 on Today at 11:18:31 AM

So I compiled it on Windows and it works in general, here are the findings: (just to share info with you now)

- in "printf" for DP size one X slipped to the right a few positions

- it seems you changed DP meaning comparing to JLP code? his mask is from left like FFFE000.....
and yours is from right like .....00000007 ?? (or it is a small bug?)

- the bigest surprise for me was that my altered code (99,99999% yours) is happy with input conf file
and provided public key "lies on the curve" but your code as it is complains that it "not lie on the curve"
at this moment I do not know if CPU always makes this check so in your case maybe GPU calculates also this
input check and it is correct?

My code even finds a private key but (of course) it is slower than JLP 125b version. What I do not understand is
that JLP behaves everytime about the same, but your version finds solution for the same config input file in time
between, say, zero (!) time to 5 minutes (?)

I admit I never tested it on Windows, but felt the need to update the printf statements for Windows because I altered the DPmask (I now know that that is a terrible idea. N.B: *never try to make your own DPmask* because usually it'll just screw up the search.

Quote from: sky59sky59 on Today at 11:18:31 AM

I was also thinking how it would be possible to check the program. Do you think it would be possible instead
of those random numbers to use some precalculated values in program so it can quickly find a test private key?
This only for testing reasons.

JLP has a switch inside the program that runs a self-test containing add/mul/hashing/pk finding operations and reports the results. It's more of a benchmark program than a tester however, but at least it will throw an error and about if the operation fails.