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

Possible Issue with Intel 17.0.098 and GCC 6.1.0 in Develop Branch #445

Closed
nmhamster opened this issue Sep 28, 2016 · 13 comments
Closed

Possible Issue with Intel 17.0.098 and GCC 6.1.0 in Develop Branch #445

nmhamster opened this issue Sep 28, 2016 · 13 comments
Labels
Bug Broken / incorrect code; it could be Kokkos' responsibility, or others’ (e.g., Trilinos) Enhancement Improve existing capability; will potentially require voting
Milestone

Comments

@nmhamster
Copy link
Contributor

Not sure if this will be reproducible on other machines but we are seeing Kokkos::initialize hang in the SharedAllocationRecord constructor when using Intel 17.0.098 with GCC 6.1.0 and the OpenMP backend when compiling for KNL. The code will just hang in the initialize call forever and make no progress.

@nmhamster nmhamster added Bug Broken / incorrect code; it could be Kokkos' responsibility, or others’ (e.g., Trilinos) InDevelop labels Sep 28, 2016
@crtrott crtrott removed the InDevelop label Sep 28, 2016
@crtrott
Copy link
Member

crtrott commented Sep 28, 2016

I wonder if this is related to issue #298. Btw we use the InDevelop label to indicate that a solution (either a new feature or a bugfix) made it into the develop branch.

@nmhamster
Copy link
Contributor Author

Could be. I can only debug so far with gdb etc but its definitely in the constructor for SharedAllocationRecord. Thanks for note on InDevelop, is there a way to tell you this bug is in master and/or develop?

@crtrott
Copy link
Member

crtrott commented Sep 28, 2016

Nope there is not (a label). If you find a bug in develop in a non-experimental feature (there is an extra label for experimental) than it is most likely in master as well.

@crtrott
Copy link
Member

crtrott commented Sep 28, 2016

Can you install GCC 6.1 on bowman? Otherwise I install it locally for me to reproduce.

@nmhamster
Copy link
Contributor Author

We will get to this later today, we are still running some shake down stuff here and will get you some more info later today. I wouldn't spend long on this until we can work through some of this on the system we are using first.

@crtrott crtrott added the Enhancement Improve existing capability; will potentially require voting label Sep 28, 2016
@crtrott
Copy link
Member

crtrott commented Sep 28, 2016

Also mark as enhancement, since GCC 6 is not yet officially supported (i.e. this request asks to fix a situation which is not supposed to work).

@crtrott
Copy link
Member

crtrott commented Oct 29, 2016

Using Intel 17.0.098 with GCC 6.2 on Bowman doesn't link:

ld: cannot find -lgcc

So I can't verify right now.

@nmhamster
Copy link
Contributor Author

@crtrott how did you load the modules?

@crtrott
Copy link
Member

crtrott commented Oct 29, 2016

I did load intel/compiler/17.0.098 and then swap gcc.

@nmhamster
Copy link
Contributor Author

@crtrott - can you try that again please? There is a very subtle file path change in GCC6.2.0 which may be causing your issue. I was able to compile fine before change and it's also working for me after so it's a little odd.

@crtrott
Copy link
Member

crtrott commented Oct 30, 2016

Looks like it works on the compute nodes, but not on the headnode.

@nmhamster
Copy link
Contributor Author

Working for me. Can you email me offline with a copy of the env command after you configure your modules?

@crtrott
Copy link
Member

crtrott commented Oct 30, 2016

anyway looks like it is working now.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Bug Broken / incorrect code; it could be Kokkos' responsibility, or others’ (e.g., Trilinos) Enhancement Improve existing capability; will potentially require voting
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants