Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

coalescing plugin handler is not optional any more #2105

Closed
biddisco opened this issue Apr 19, 2016 · 3 comments · Fixed by #2107
Closed

coalescing plugin handler is not optional any more #2105

biddisco opened this issue Apr 19, 2016 · 3 comments · Fixed by #2107

Comments

@biddisco
Copy link
Contributor

biddisco commented Apr 19, 2016

If you compile a simple test app without building hpx-plugins first (only linking against libhpx and libhpx_iostreams for example), then the application will fail at runtime with an exception

{what}: attempt to create message handler plugin instance of invalid/unknown type: \
    coalescing_message_handler: HPX(bad_plugin_type)

It seems that the attempt to load the plugin should fail gracefully, but instead triggers an abort.

@biddisco biddisco changed the title coalescing plugin handler is not an option any more coalescing plugin handler is not optional any more Apr 19, 2016
@hkaiser hkaiser added this to the 0.9.12 milestone Apr 19, 2016
@biddisco
Copy link
Contributor Author

After doing some more experiments, it appears to be a problem with release builds that come from external applications built against the hpx tree. I'm a bit confused, but I can delete the parcel_coalescing plugin from the build tree and debug works fine, but release it broken, whether it is present or not.
I will continue to experiment.

@hkaiser
Copy link
Member

hkaiser commented Apr 19, 2016

@biddisco I have it reproduced locally, even in a debug build. Will investgate...

@zao
Copy link
Contributor

zao commented Apr 20, 2016

On this subject, last I tried building HPX the parcel plugins were not in the dependency chain of make tests, which led to an 86% test failure rate. Did that get resolved and might the lack of a suitable dependency be part of this?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
3 participants