February 2016 - discuss - mailman3.cels.anl.gov

MPI_Comm_split and end with Finalize
by K. N. Ramachandran 26 Feb '16

26 Feb '16

Hello all, I have recently begun working on a project that uses MPICH-3.2 and I am trying to resolve an issue where a server process busy waits at MPI_Finalize. We are trying to create a server process that accepts incoming connections from a known number of clients (say, N clients), forms a new communicator amongst everyone (server and clients) and then splits itself from the group and terminates, so that the clients now only work with each other. For very problem specific reasons, we cannot do 'mpiexec -np N (other args)' So we have a server that publishes a service name to a nameserver and clients lookup the name to join the server. The server and client processes are started with separate calls to mpiexec, one to start the server and the rest N calls to start the clients. The server process busy-waits at the MPI_Finalize call, after it splits from the communicator and only finishes when all other clients reach their MPI_Finalize too. Consider a simplified case of only one server and one client. The simplified pseudocode is: *Server process:* MPI_Init(); MPI_Open_port(...); MPI_Publish_name(...); //publish service name to nameserver MPI_accept(...); // accept incoming connections and store into intercomm MPI_Intercomm_merge(...); // merge new client into intra-comm // now split the server from the client MPI_Comm_rank(intra comm, rank); // rank=0 MPI_Comm_split(intra comm, (rank==0), rank, lone comm); MPI_Finalize(); // busy-waits here till client's sleep duration *Client process:* (simplified - assuming only one client is trying to connect) MPI_Init(); MPI_Lookup_name(..); MPI_Connect(...) // merge MPI_Intercomm_merge(...); // merge with server // get rank and split MPI_Comm_rank(intra comm, rank); // rank=1 MPI_Comm_split(intra comm, rank==0, rank, lone comm); sleep(10); // sleep for 10 seconds - causes server to busy wait at MPI_Finalize for sleep duration MPI_Finalize(); // server and client finish here So my questions are: 1) Is busy-wait at MPI_Finalize the expected behaviour? 2) How to truly "disconnect" the server, so that it can end immediately at MPI_Finalize()? I had tried MPI_Comm_disconnect (also MPI_Comm_free) on both the server and client, but that didn't help. 3) We don't want to see the server process consuming one core at 100% while it waits at MPI_Finalize. Are other alternatives apart from making the server process sleep, wakeup and keep polling a client, and then finally call MPI_Finalize? Thank you for any inputs that you can give here. Regards, K.N.Ramachandran _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss(a)mpich.org To manage subscription options or unsubscribe: https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

1 0

Re: [mpich-discuss] MPICH 3.2 on BlueGene/Q
by pramod kumbhar 25 Feb '16

25 Feb '16

Dear Rob, I have built your fork of mpich on bg-q and I see below error while testing simple example of MPI_File_iwrite_all: ○ → srun -n 2 ./nonblock_io Abort(1) on node 0: 'MPI_IN_PLACE' requries support for `PAMI_IN_PLACE` Abort(1) on node 1: 'MPI_IN_PLACE' requries support for `PAMI_IN_PLACE` 2016-02-25 21:45:18.183 (WARN ) [0xfffacbf8f50] 424617:ibm.runjob.client.Job: normal termination with status 1 from rank 0 I have compiled the mpich as: ./configure --enable-threads=multiple --host=powerpc64-bgq-linux --with-device=pamid --prefix=$INSTALL_PREFIX --with-file-system=gpfs:BGQ --with-bgq-install-dir=/bgsys/drivers/V1R2M0/ppc64 --with-pami=/bgsys/drivers/V1R2M0/ppc64/comm/sys --with-pami-include=/bgsys/drivers/V1R2M0/ppc64/comm/sys/include --with-pami-lib=/bgsys/drivers/V1R2M0/ppc64/comm/sys/lib --enable-fast=nochkmsg,notiming,O3 --with-assert-level=0 --disable-error-messages --disable-debuginfo MPICHLIB_CXXFLAGS="-qhot -qinline=800 -qflag=i:i -qsaveopt -qsuppress=1506-236" MPICHLIB_CFLAGS="${MPICHLIB_CXXFLAGS}" MPICHLIB_FFLAGS="${MPICHLIB_CXXFLAGS}" MPICHLIB_F90FLAGS="${MPICHLIB_CXXFLAGS}" make -j12 make install Let me know if I have missing anything. -Pramod On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 8:04 PM, pramod kumbhar <pramod.s.kumbhar(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Dear All, > > I came across below thread in the archives about mpich 3.2 on BG-Q. > > I am testing non-blocking collectives, i/o functions on cluster and would like to do the same on BG-Q. I have following questions: > > 1. Last email from Dominic suggest that last "compilable" version doesn't support async progress. Is there any version that has non-blocking support and compiles on bg-q? (the fork from Rob?) > > 2. Do I have to consider anything specific on bg-q while benchmarking non-blocking functions (from mpi-3) ? > > Thanks in advance! > > Regards, > > Pramod > > p.s. I am copying the email thread from archive, not sure if this will be delivered to the correct thread... > > > Hi All, > > Here is an update: > > MPICH 3.1.3 is the last version that passed the nonblocking test, even without setting PAMID_THREAD_MULTIPLE. However, setting PAMID_ASYNC_PROGRESS=1 will cause error.(Abort(1) on node 7: 'locking' async progress not applicable...) > > [chiensh at cumulus <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> coll.bak]$ which mpif90 > ~/apps/mpich/3.1.3/bin/mpif90 > [chiensh at cumulus <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> coll.bak]$ make nonblocking > CC nonblocking.o > CCLD nonblocking > [chiensh at cumulus <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> coll.bak]$ srun -n 2 ./nonblocking > No errors > [chiensh at cumulus <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> coll.bak]$ srun -n 4 ./nonblocking > No errors > [chiensh at cumulus <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> coll.bak]$ srun -n 16 ./nonblocking > No errors > > Thanks all! > > Regards, > Dominic > > > On 11 Jan, 2016, at 2:29 pm, Dominic Chien <chiensh.acrc at gmail.com <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>> wrote: > > >* Thank you Jeff and Halim, > *> >* Halim, I have tried 3.1.4 but it does not return 0 (error) when the program is finished, e.g. for a helloworld program > *>* ================================================================== > *>* program hello > *>* include 'mpif.h' > *>* integer rank, size, ierror, tag, status(MPI_STATUS_SIZE) > *> >* call MPI_INIT(ierror) > *>* call MPI_COMM_SIZE(MPI_COMM_WORLD, size, ierror) > *>* call MPI_COMM_RANK(MPI_COMM_WORLD, rank, ierror) > *>* print*, 'node', rank, ': Hello world' > *>* call MPI_FINALIZE(ierror) > *>* end > *>* ================================================================== > *> >* Using MPI 3.1.rc4 > *>* ================================================================== > *>* [chiensh at cumulus <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> test]$ which mpif90 > *>* ~/apps/mpich/3.1.rc4/bin/mpif90 > *>* [chiensh at cumulus <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> test]$ srun -n 2 ./a.out > *>* node 1 : Hello world > *>* node 0 : Hello world > *>* [chiensh at cumulus <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> test]$ > *>* ================================================================== > *>* Using MPI 3.1.4 > *>* ================================================================== > *>* [chiensh at cumulus <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> test]$ which mpif90 > *>* ~/apps/mpich/3.1.4/bin/mpif90 > *>* [chiensh at cumulus <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> test]$ srun -n 2 ./a.out > *>* node 1 : Hello world > *>* node 0 : Hello world > *>* 2016-01-11 14:24:25.968 (WARN ) [0xfff7ef48b10] 75532:ibm.runjob.client.Job: terminated by signal 11 > *>* 2016-01-11 14:24:25.968 (WARN ) [0xfff7ef48b10] 75532:ibm.runjob.client.Job: abnormal termination by signal 11 from rank 1 > *>* ================================================================== > *> > >* Jeff, after I set PAMID_THREAD_MULTIPLE=1 and PAMID_ASYNC_PROGRESS=1, it seems to have some "improvement": nonblocking test can run for up to 4 processes sometime, but sometime it just get a "deadlock", (see below) > *>* ========================================================== > *>* [chiensh at cumulus <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> coll.bak]$ srun --nodes=4 --ntasks-per-node=1 nonblocking > *>* MPIDI_Process.* > *>* verbose : 2 > *>* statistics : 1 > *>* contexts : 32 > *>* async_progress : 1 > *>* context_post : 1 > *>* pt2pt.limits > *>* application > *>* eager > *>* remote, local : 4097, 4097 > *>* short > *>* remote, local : 113, 113 > *>* internal > *>* eager > *>* remote, local : 4097, 4097 > *>* short > *>* remote, local : 113, 113 > *>* rma_pending : 1000 > *>* shmem_pt2pt : 1 > *>* disable_internal_eager_scale : 524288 > *>* optimized.collectives : 0 > *>* optimized.select_colls: 2 > *>* optimized.subcomms : 1 > *>* optimized.memory : 0 > *>* optimized.num_requests: 1 > *>* mpir_nbc : 1 > *>* numTasks : 4 > *>* mpi thread level : 'MPI_THREAD_SINGLE' > *>* MPIU_THREAD_GRANULARITY : 'per object' > *>* ASSERT_LEVEL : 0 > *>* MPICH_LIBDIR : not defined > *>* The following MPICH_* environment variables were specified: > *>* The following PAMID_* environment variables were specified: > *>* PAMID_STATISTICS=1 > *>* PAMID_ASYNC_PROGRESS=1 > *>* PAMID_THREAD_MULTIPLE=1 > *>* PAMID_VERBOSE=2 > *>* The following PAMI_* environment variables were specified: > *>* The following COMMAGENT_* environment variables were specified: > *>* The following MUSPI_* environment variables were specified: > *>* The following BG_* environment variables were specified: > *>* No errors > *>* ========================================================== > *>* [chiensh at cumulus <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> coll.bak]$ srun --nodes=4 --ntasks-per-node=1 nonblocking > *>* MPIDI_Process.* > *>* verbose : 2 > *>* statistics : 1 > *>* contexts : 32 > *>* async_progress : 1 > *>* context_post : 1 > *>* pt2pt.limits > *>* application > *>* eager > *>* remote, local : 4097, 4097 > *>* short > *>* remote, local : 113, 113 > *>* internal > *>* eager > *>* remote, local : 4097, 4097 > *>* short > *>* remote, local : 113, 113 > *>* rma_pending : 1000 > *>* shmem_pt2pt : 1 > *>* disable_internal_eager_scale : 524288 > *>* optimized.collectives : 0 > *>* optimized.select_colls: 2 > *>* optimized.subcomms : 1 > *>* optimized.memory : 0 > *>* optimized.num_requests: 1 > *>* mpir_nbc : 1 > *>* numTasks : 4 > *>* mpi thread level : 'MPI_THREAD_SINGLE' > *>* MPIU_THREAD_GRANULARITY : 'per object' > *>* ASSERT_LEVEL : 0 > *>* MPICH_LIBDIR : not defined > *>* The following MPICH_* environment variables were specified: > *>* The following PAMID_* environment variables were specified: > *>* PAMID_STATISTICS=1 > *>* PAMID_ASYNC_PROGRESS=1 > *>* PAMID_THREAD_MULTIPLE=1 > *>* PAMID_VERBOSE=2 > *>* The following PAMI_* environment variables were specified: > *>* The following COMMAGENT_* environment variables were specified: > *>* The following MUSPI_* environment variables were specified: > *>* The following BG_* environment variables were specified: > *>* (never return from here) > *>* ========================================================== > *> >* Thanks! > *> >* Regards, > *>* Dominic > *> > >* On 11 Jan, 2016, at 12:08 pm, Halim Amer <aamer at anl.gov <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>> wrote: > *> >>* Dominic, > *>> >>* There were a bunch of fixes that went to PAMID since v3.1rc4. You could try a release from the 3.1 series (i.e. from 3.1 through 3.1.4). > *>> >>* Regards, > *>>* --Halim > *>> >>* www.mcs.anl.gov/~aamer <http://www.mcs.anl.gov/~aamer> > *>* On 11 Jan, 2016, at 11:30 am, Jeff Hammond <jeff.science at gmail.com <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>> wrote: > *>>* I recall MPI-3 RMA on BGQ deadlocks if you set PAMID_THREAD_MULTIPLE (please see ALCF MPI docs to verify exact name), which is required for async progress. > *>> >>* ARMCI-MPI test suite is one good way to validate MPI-3 RMA is working. > *>> >>* Jeff > *> > > _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss(a)mpich.org To manage subscription options or unsubscribe: https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

1 0

Re: [mpich-discuss] MPICH 3.2 on BlueGene/Q
by pramod kumbhar 25 Feb '16

25 Feb '16

Dear All, I came across below thread in the archives about mpich 3.2 on BG-Q. I am testing non-blocking collectives, i/o functions on cluster and would like to do the same on BG-Q. I have following questions: 1. Last email from Dominic suggest that last "compilable" version doesn't support async progress. Is there any version that has non-blocking support and compiles on bg-q? (the fork from Rob?) 2. Do I have to consider anything specific on bg-q while benchmarking non-blocking functions (from mpi-3) ? Thanks in advance! Regards, Pramod p.s. I am copying the email thread from archive, not sure if this will be delivered to the correct thread... Hi All, Here is an update: MPICH 3.1.3 is the last version that passed the nonblocking test, even without setting PAMID_THREAD_MULTIPLE. However, setting PAMID_ASYNC_PROGRESS=1 will cause error.(Abort(1) on node 7: 'locking' async progress not applicable...) [chiensh at cumulus <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> coll.bak]$ which mpif90 ~/apps/mpich/3.1.3/bin/mpif90 [chiensh at cumulus <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> coll.bak]$ make nonblocking CC nonblocking.o CCLD nonblocking [chiensh at cumulus <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> coll.bak]$ srun -n 2 ./nonblocking No errors [chiensh at cumulus <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> coll.bak]$ srun -n 4 ./nonblocking No errors [chiensh at cumulus <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> coll.bak]$ srun -n 16 ./nonblocking No errors Thanks all! Regards, Dominic On 11 Jan, 2016, at 2:29 pm, Dominic Chien <chiensh.acrc at gmail.com <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>> wrote: >* Thank you Jeff and Halim, *> >* Halim, I have tried 3.1.4 but it does not return 0 (error) when the program is finished, e.g. for a helloworld program *>* ================================================================== *>* program hello *>* include 'mpif.h' *>* integer rank, size, ierror, tag, status(MPI_STATUS_SIZE) *> >* call MPI_INIT(ierror) *>* call MPI_COMM_SIZE(MPI_COMM_WORLD, size, ierror) *>* call MPI_COMM_RANK(MPI_COMM_WORLD, rank, ierror) *>* print*, 'node', rank, ': Hello world' *>* call MPI_FINALIZE(ierror) *>* end *>* ================================================================== *> >* Using MPI 3.1.rc4 *>* ================================================================== *>* [chiensh at cumulus <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> test]$ which mpif90 *>* ~/apps/mpich/3.1.rc4/bin/mpif90 *>* [chiensh at cumulus <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> test]$ srun -n 2 ./a.out *>* node 1 : Hello world *>* node 0 : Hello world *>* [chiensh at cumulus <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> test]$ *>* ================================================================== *>* Using MPI 3.1.4 *>* ================================================================== *>* [chiensh at cumulus <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> test]$ which mpif90 *>* ~/apps/mpich/3.1.4/bin/mpif90 *>* [chiensh at cumulus <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> test]$ srun -n 2 ./a.out *>* node 1 : Hello world *>* node 0 : Hello world *>* 2016-01-11 14:24:25.968 (WARN ) [0xfff7ef48b10] 75532:ibm.runjob.client.Job: terminated by signal 11 *>* 2016-01-11 14:24:25.968 (WARN ) [0xfff7ef48b10] 75532:ibm.runjob.client.Job: abnormal termination by signal 11 from rank 1 *>* ================================================================== *> > >* Jeff, after I set PAMID_THREAD_MULTIPLE=1 and PAMID_ASYNC_PROGRESS=1, it seems to have some "improvement": nonblocking test can run for up to 4 processes sometime, but sometime it just get a "deadlock", (see below) *>* ========================================================== *>* [chiensh at cumulus <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> coll.bak]$ srun --nodes=4 --ntasks-per-node=1 nonblocking *>* MPIDI_Process.* *>* verbose : 2 *>* statistics : 1 *>* contexts : 32 *>* async_progress : 1 *>* context_post : 1 *>* pt2pt.limits *>* application *>* eager *>* remote, local : 4097, 4097 *>* short *>* remote, local : 113, 113 *>* internal *>* eager *>* remote, local : 4097, 4097 *>* short *>* remote, local : 113, 113 *>* rma_pending : 1000 *>* shmem_pt2pt : 1 *>* disable_internal_eager_scale : 524288 *>* optimized.collectives : 0 *>* optimized.select_colls: 2 *>* optimized.subcomms : 1 *>* optimized.memory : 0 *>* optimized.num_requests: 1 *>* mpir_nbc : 1 *>* numTasks : 4 *>* mpi thread level : 'MPI_THREAD_SINGLE' *>* MPIU_THREAD_GRANULARITY : 'per object' *>* ASSERT_LEVEL : 0 *>* MPICH_LIBDIR : not defined *>* The following MPICH_* environment variables were specified: *>* The following PAMID_* environment variables were specified: *>* PAMID_STATISTICS=1 *>* PAMID_ASYNC_PROGRESS=1 *>* PAMID_THREAD_MULTIPLE=1 *>* PAMID_VERBOSE=2 *>* The following PAMI_* environment variables were specified: *>* The following COMMAGENT_* environment variables were specified: *>* The following MUSPI_* environment variables were specified: *>* The following BG_* environment variables were specified: *>* No errors *>* ========================================================== *>* [chiensh at cumulus <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> coll.bak]$ srun --nodes=4 --ntasks-per-node=1 nonblocking *>* MPIDI_Process.* *>* verbose : 2 *>* statistics : 1 *>* contexts : 32 *>* async_progress : 1 *>* context_post : 1 *>* pt2pt.limits *>* application *>* eager *>* remote, local : 4097, 4097 *>* short *>* remote, local : 113, 113 *>* internal *>* eager *>* remote, local : 4097, 4097 *>* short *>* remote, local : 113, 113 *>* rma_pending : 1000 *>* shmem_pt2pt : 1 *>* disable_internal_eager_scale : 524288 *>* optimized.collectives : 0 *>* optimized.select_colls: 2 *>* optimized.subcomms : 1 *>* optimized.memory : 0 *>* optimized.num_requests: 1 *>* mpir_nbc : 1 *>* numTasks : 4 *>* mpi thread level : 'MPI_THREAD_SINGLE' *>* MPIU_THREAD_GRANULARITY : 'per object' *>* ASSERT_LEVEL : 0 *>* MPICH_LIBDIR : not defined *>* The following MPICH_* environment variables were specified: *>* The following PAMID_* environment variables were specified: *>* PAMID_STATISTICS=1 *>* PAMID_ASYNC_PROGRESS=1 *>* PAMID_THREAD_MULTIPLE=1 *>* PAMID_VERBOSE=2 *>* The following PAMI_* environment variables were specified: *>* The following COMMAGENT_* environment variables were specified: *>* The following MUSPI_* environment variables were specified: *>* The following BG_* environment variables were specified: *>* (never return from here) *>* ========================================================== *> >* Thanks! *> >* Regards, *>* Dominic *> > >* On 11 Jan, 2016, at 12:08 pm, Halim Amer <aamer at anl.gov <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>> wrote: *> >>* Dominic, *>> >>* There were a bunch of fixes that went to PAMID since v3.1rc4. You could try a release from the 3.1 series (i.e. from 3.1 through 3.1.4). *>> >>* Regards, *>>* --Halim *>> >>* www.mcs.anl.gov/~aamer <http://www.mcs.anl.gov/~aamer> *>* On 11 Jan, 2016, at 11:30 am, Jeff Hammond <jeff.science at gmail.com <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>> wrote: *>>* I recall MPI-3 RMA on BGQ deadlocks if you set PAMID_THREAD_MULTIPLE (please see ALCF MPI docs to verify exact name), which is required for async progress. *>> >>* ARMCI-MPI test suite is one good way to validate MPI-3 RMA is working. *>> >>* Jeff *> _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss(a)mpich.org To manage subscription options or unsubscribe: https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

1 0

Re: [mpich-discuss] mpif77 -f77=gfortran
by Kenneth Raffenetti 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

That's a fair point about the manpage. We probably want to suppress the mpif77 manpage and instead redirect to mpifort for installations like this. I'll make a ticket to track the issue. Thanks, Ken On 02/17/2016 02:43 AM, Andreas Gocht wrote: > Hi Ken > > thanks for the explanation. I just wondered as according to the man page > the -f77 is valid. Yet I didn't recognize that there is just a link in > my case to mpifort. Is it probably an Idea to mention this behavior in > the man page? > > Best Andreas > > Am 16.02.2016 um 22:38 schrieb Kenneth Raffenetti: >> Hi Andreas, >> >> In MPICH 3.2, if configure detects your F77 and FC compilers are the >> same, a single mpifort compiler wrapper is built. Symlinks for mpif77 >> and mpif90 are maintained, but in your case are not fully backwards >> compatible. The newer mpifort does not recognize -f77. It should >> recognize -fc, however. >> >> Ken >> >> On 02/16/2016 06:17 AM, Andreas Gocht wrote: >>> Hey there >>> >>> I tired to compile a program using autotools. I realized that during the >>> configure autotools is trying to compile "mpif77 -f77=gfortran -c -g >>> conftest.f". The compilation fails with: >>> >>> configure:18975: mpif77 -f77=gfortran -c -g conftest.f >&5 >>> gfortran: error: unrecognized command line option '-f77=gfortran' >>> configure:18975: $? = 1 >>> configure: failed program was: >>> | program main >>> | >>> | end >>> configure:18983: result: no >>> >>> witch leads the whole configure to fail. >>> >>> I tried to compile the sample program on the command line unsing "mpif77 >>> -f77=gfortran test.f" and I got the same result (test.f containing just >>> "program main \n \n end"). >>> According to the man page of MPICH v3.2 "-f77" should choose the used >>> Fortran compiler? It looks like the option is passed to fortran itself? >>> I tried it with MPICH v3.2 as well as with the latest version form the >>> git. MPICH 3.1 is working fine. >>> Has there something changed between MPICH 3.1 and 3.2? >>> >>> Best Andreas >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> discuss mailing list discuss(a)mpich.org >>> To manage subscription options or unsubscribe: >>> https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> discuss mailing list discuss(a)mpich.org >> To manage subscription options or unsubscribe: >> https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > > > _______________________________________________ > discuss mailing list discuss(a)mpich.org > To manage subscription options or unsubscribe: > https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss(a)mpich.org To manage subscription options or unsubscribe: https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

1 0

Re: [mpich-discuss] mpif77 -f77=gfortran
by Andreas Gocht 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

Hi Ken thanks for the explanation. I just wondered as according to the man page the -f77 is valid. Yet I didn't recognize that there is just a link in my case to mpifort. Is it probably an Idea to mention this behavior in the man page? Best Andreas Am 16.02.2016 um 22:38 schrieb Kenneth Raffenetti: > Hi Andreas, > > In MPICH 3.2, if configure detects your F77 and FC compilers are the > same, a single mpifort compiler wrapper is built. Symlinks for mpif77 > and mpif90 are maintained, but in your case are not fully backwards > compatible. The newer mpifort does not recognize -f77. It should > recognize -fc, however. > > Ken > > On 02/16/2016 06:17 AM, Andreas Gocht wrote: >> Hey there >> >> I tired to compile a program using autotools. I realized that during the >> configure autotools is trying to compile "mpif77 -f77=gfortran -c -g >> conftest.f". The compilation fails with: >> >> configure:18975: mpif77 -f77=gfortran -c -g conftest.f >&5 >> gfortran: error: unrecognized command line option '-f77=gfortran' >> configure:18975: $? = 1 >> configure: failed program was: >> | program main >> | >> | end >> configure:18983: result: no >> >> witch leads the whole configure to fail. >> >> I tried to compile the sample program on the command line unsing "mpif77 >> -f77=gfortran test.f" and I got the same result (test.f containing just >> "program main \n \n end"). >> According to the man page of MPICH v3.2 "-f77" should choose the used >> Fortran compiler? It looks like the option is passed to fortran itself? >> I tried it with MPICH v3.2 as well as with the latest version form the >> git. MPICH 3.1 is working fine. >> Has there something changed between MPICH 3.1 and 3.2? >> >> Best Andreas >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> discuss mailing list discuss(a)mpich.org >> To manage subscription options or unsubscribe: >> https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >> > _______________________________________________ > discuss mailing list discuss(a)mpich.org > To manage subscription options or unsubscribe: > https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss -- M.Sc. Andreas Gocht Technische Universität Dresden Center for Information Services and High Performance Computing (ZIH) D-01062 Dresden Germany Contact: Willersbau, Room A 104 Phone: (+49) 351 463-36415 Fax: (+49) 351 463-3773 e-mail: andreas.gocht(a)tu-dresden.de _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss(a)mpich.org To manage subscription options or unsubscribe: https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

1 0

Re: [mpich-discuss] mpif77 -f77=gfortran
by Kenneth Raffenetti 16 Feb '16

16 Feb '16

Hi Andreas, In MPICH 3.2, if configure detects your F77 and FC compilers are the same, a single mpifort compiler wrapper is built. Symlinks for mpif77 and mpif90 are maintained, but in your case are not fully backwards compatible. The newer mpifort does not recognize -f77. It should recognize -fc, however. Ken On 02/16/2016 06:17 AM, Andreas Gocht wrote: > Hey there > > I tired to compile a program using autotools. I realized that during the > configure autotools is trying to compile "mpif77 -f77=gfortran -c -g > conftest.f". The compilation fails with: > > configure:18975: mpif77 -f77=gfortran -c -g conftest.f >&5 > gfortran: error: unrecognized command line option '-f77=gfortran' > configure:18975: $? = 1 > configure: failed program was: > | program main > | > | end > configure:18983: result: no > > witch leads the whole configure to fail. > > I tried to compile the sample program on the command line unsing "mpif77 > -f77=gfortran test.f" and I got the same result (test.f containing just > "program main \n \n end"). > According to the man page of MPICH v3.2 "-f77" should choose the used > Fortran compiler? It looks like the option is passed to fortran itself? > I tried it with MPICH v3.2 as well as with the latest version form the > git. MPICH 3.1 is working fine. > Has there something changed between MPICH 3.1 and 3.2? > > Best Andreas > > > > _______________________________________________ > discuss mailing list discuss(a)mpich.org > To manage subscription options or unsubscribe: > https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss(a)mpich.org To manage subscription options or unsubscribe: https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

1 0

mpif77 -f77=gfortran
by Andreas Gocht 16 Feb '16

16 Feb '16

Hey there I tired to compile a program using autotools. I realized that during the configure autotools is trying to compile "mpif77 -f77=gfortran -c -g conftest.f". The compilation fails with: configure:18975: mpif77 -f77=gfortran -c -g conftest.f >&5 gfortran: error: unrecognized command line option '-f77=gfortran' configure:18975: $? = 1 configure: failed program was: | program main | | end configure:18983: result: no witch leads the whole configure to fail. I tried to compile the sample program on the command line unsing "mpif77 -f77=gfortran test.f" and I got the same result (test.f containing just "program main \n \n end"). According to the man page of MPICH v3.2 "-f77" should choose the used Fortran compiler? It looks like the option is passed to fortran itself? I tried it with MPICH v3.2 as well as with the latest version form the git. MPICH 3.1 is working fine. Has there something changed between MPICH 3.1 and 3.2? Best Andreas -- M.Sc. Andreas Gocht Technische Universität Dresden Center for Information Services and High Performance Computing (ZIH) D-01062 Dresden Germany Contact: Willersbau, Room A 104 Phone: (+49) 351 463-36415 Fax: (+49) 351 463-3773 e-mail: andreas.gocht(a)tu-dresden.de _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss(a)mpich.org To manage subscription options or unsubscribe: https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

1 0

Re: [mpich-discuss] how to set ssh port in mpich
by Balaji, Pavan 15 Feb '16

15 Feb '16

Actually, you can use the HYDRA_LAUNCHER_EXTRA_ARGS environment variable to pass extra options to the hydra launcher (in this case, ssh). -- Pavan > On Feb 15, 2016, at 9:18 AM, Kenneth Raffenetti <raffenet(a)mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > > You might try setting up a .ssh/config file in your home directory that sets an alternative port for the hosts you are using. There is currently no explicit way to do this with Hydra (mpiexec). > > Ken > > On 02/15/2016 04:21 AM, Doha Ehab wrote: >> Hello, >> I am using mpich-3 ,I want to run it on multiple nodes but ssh doesn't >> use the default port "22" , how to specify the the port that ssh is >> using is there is "-p" like command in mpich I have been searching with >> no luck. >> >> thanks >> Doha >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> discuss mailing list discuss(a)mpich.org >> To manage subscription options or unsubscribe: >> https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >> > _______________________________________________ > discuss mailing list discuss(a)mpich.org > To manage subscription options or unsubscribe: > https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss(a)mpich.org To manage subscription options or unsubscribe: https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

1 0

Re: [mpich-discuss] how to set ssh port in mpich
by Kenneth Raffenetti 15 Feb '16

15 Feb '16

You might try setting up a .ssh/config file in your home directory that sets an alternative port for the hosts you are using. There is currently no explicit way to do this with Hydra (mpiexec). Ken On 02/15/2016 04:21 AM, Doha Ehab wrote: > Hello, > I am using mpich-3 ,I want to run it on multiple nodes but ssh doesn't > use the default port "22" , how to specify the the port that ssh is > using is there is "-p" like command in mpich I have been searching with > no luck. > > thanks > Doha > > > > _______________________________________________ > discuss mailing list discuss(a)mpich.org > To manage subscription options or unsubscribe: > https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss(a)mpich.org To manage subscription options or unsubscribe: https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

1 0

how to set ssh port in mpich
by Doha Ehab 15 Feb '16

15 Feb '16

Hello, I am using mpich-3 ,I want to run it on multiple nodes but ssh doesn't use the default port "22" , how to specify the the port that ssh is using is there is "-p" like command in mpich I have been searching with no luck. thanks Doha _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss(a)mpich.org To manage subscription options or unsubscribe: https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

1 0