- discuss - mailman3.cels.anl.gov

process-core binding doesn't work on newer multisocket opteron systems with mpich 3.0.x
by Róbert Špir 02 Feb '13

02 Feb '13

Hello, we have multiple quad-socket AMD opteron systems with linux operating system. Since these systems are NUMA architecture, we are using binding of MPI processes to single NUMA nodes for optimal local memory usage. With our older systems, with 4 quadcore processors the binding in mpich 3 works as expected, so when we use "mpiexec ... -bind-to numa ..." the MPI processes are bound to NUMA nodes. The output of hwloc lstopo is: Machine (128GB) NUMANode L#0 (P#0 32GB) Socket L#0 + L3 L#0 (2048KB) L2 L#0 (512KB) + L1d L#0 (64KB) + L1i L#0 (64KB) + Core L#0 + PU L#0 (P#0) L2 L#1 (512KB) + L1d L#1 (64KB) + L1i L#1 (64KB) + Core L#1 + PU L#1 (P#1) L2 L#2 (512KB) + L1d L#2 (64KB) + L1i L#2 (64KB) + Core L#2 + PU L#2 (P#2) L2 L#3 (512KB) + L1d L#3 (64KB) + L1i L#3 (64KB) + Core L#3 + PU L#3 (P#3) HostBridge L#0 PCI 10de:036e Block L#0 "sr0" PCI 10de:037f PCI 10de:037f PCI 10de:037f PCIBridge PCI 1002:515e GPU L#1 "card0" PCIBridge PCI 1000:0058 Block L#2 "sda" NUMANode L#1 (P#1 32GB) + Socket L#1 + L3 L#1 (2048KB) L2 L#4 (512KB) + L1d L#4 (64KB) + L1i L#4 (64KB) + Core L#4 + PU L#4 (P#4) L2 L#5 (512KB) + L1d L#5 (64KB) + L1i L#5 (64KB) + Core L#5 + PU L#5 (P#5) L2 L#6 (512KB) + L1d L#6 (64KB) + L1i L#6 (64KB) + Core L#6 + PU L#6 (P#6) L2 L#7 (512KB) + L1d L#7 (64KB) + L1i L#7 (64KB) + Core L#7 + PU L#7 (P#7) NUMANode L#2 (P#2 32GB) + Socket L#2 + L3 L#2 (2048KB) L2 L#8 (512KB) + L1d L#8 (64KB) + L1i L#8 (64KB) + Core L#8 + PU L#8 (P#8) L2 L#9 (512KB) + L1d L#9 (64KB) + L1i L#9 (64KB) + Core L#9 + PU L#9 (P#9) L2 L#10 (512KB) + L1d L#10 (64KB) + L1i L#10 (64KB) + Core L#10 + PU L#10 (P#10) L2 L#11 (512KB) + L1d L#11 (64KB) + L1i L#11 (64KB) + Core L#11 + PU L#11 (P#11) NUMANode L#3 (P#3 32GB) + Socket L#3 + L3 L#3 (2048KB) L2 L#12 (512KB) + L1d L#12 (64KB) + L1i L#12 (64KB) + Core L#12 + PU L#12 (P#12) L2 L#13 (512KB) + L1d L#13 (64KB) + L1i L#13 (64KB) + Core L#13 + PU L#13 (P#13) L2 L#14 (512KB) + L1d L#14 (64KB) + L1i L#14 (64KB) + Core L#14 + PU L#14 (P#14) L2 L#15 (512KB) + L1d L#15 (64KB) + L1i L#15 (64KB) + Core L#15 + PU L#15 (P#15) Now when we try this binding on our newer systems, where we have four 8-core AMD opterons, we get errors (no form of binding works, even if we use binding to socket or core) [proxy:0:0@embryo09] get_nbobjs_by_type (../../../../src/pm/hydra/tools/topo/hwloc/topo_hwloc.c:189): assert (nb % x == 0) failed [proxy:0:0@embryo09] handle_bitmap_binding (../../../../src/pm/hydra/tools/topo/hwloc/topo_hwloc.c:450): unable to get number of objects [proxy:0:0@embryo09] HYDT_topo_hwloc_init (../../../../src/pm/hydra/tools/topo/hwloc/topo_hwloc.c:527): error binding with bind "numa" and map "(null)" [proxy:0:0@embryo09] HYDT_topo_init (../../../../src/pm/hydra/tools/topo/topo.c:60): unable to initialize hwloc [proxy:0:0@embryo09] launch_procs (../../../../src/pm/hydra/pm/pmiserv/pmip_cb.c:520): unable to initialize process topology [proxy:0:0@embryo09] HYD_pmcd_pmip_control_cmd_cb (../../../../src/pm/hydra/pm/pmiserv/pmip_cb.c:893): launch_procs returned error [proxy:0:0@embryo09] HYDT_dmxu_poll_wait_for_event (../../../../src/pm/hydra/tools/demux/demux_poll.c:77): callback returned error status [proxy:0:0@embryo09] main (../../../../src/pm/hydra/pm/pmiserv/pmip.c:206): demux engine error waiting for event [mpiexec@embryo09] control_cb (../../../../src/pm/hydra/pm/pmiserv/pmiserv_cb.c:202): assert (!closed) failed [mpiexec@embryo09] HYDT_dmxu_poll_wait_for_event (../../../../src/pm/hydra/tools/demux/demux_poll.c:77): callback returned error status [mpiexec@embryo09] HYD_pmci_wait_for_completion (../../../../src/pm/hydra/pm/pmiserv/pmiserv_pmci.c:197): error waiting for event [mpiexec@embryo09] main (../../../../src/pm/hydra/ui/mpich/mpiexec.c:330): process manager error waiting for completion lstopo output is: Machine (256GB) Socket L#0 (64GB) NUMANode L#0 (P#0 32GB) L3 L#0 (5118KB) L2 L#0 (512KB) + L1d L#0 (64KB) + L1i L#0 (64KB) + Core L#0 + PU L#0 (P#0) L2 L#1 (512KB) + L1d L#1 (64KB) + L1i L#1 (64KB) + Core L#1 + PU L#1 (P#1) L2 L#2 (512KB) + L1d L#2 (64KB) + L1i L#2 (64KB) + Core L#2 + PU L#2 (P#2) L2 L#3 (512KB) + L1d L#3 (64KB) + L1i L#3 (64KB) + Core L#3 + PU L#3 (P#3) HostBridge L#0 PCIBridge PCI 8086:10c9 Net L#0 "eth0" PCI 8086:10c9 Net L#1 "eth1" PCI 1002:4390 Block L#2 "sda" PCI 1002:439c PCIBridge PCI 102b:0532 NUMANode L#1 (P#1 32GB) + L3 L#1 (5118KB) L2 L#4 (512KB) + L1d L#4 (64KB) + L1i L#4 (64KB) + Core L#4 + PU L#4 (P#4) L2 L#5 (512KB) + L1d L#5 (64KB) + L1i L#5 (64KB) + Core L#5 + PU L#5 (P#5) L2 L#6 (512KB) + L1d L#6 (64KB) + L1i L#6 (64KB) + Core L#6 + PU L#6 (P#6) L2 L#7 (512KB) + L1d L#7 (64KB) + L1i L#7 (64KB) + Core L#7 + PU L#7 (P#7) Socket L#1 (64GB) NUMANode L#2 (P#2 32GB) + L3 L#2 (5118KB) L2 L#8 (512KB) + L1d L#8 (64KB) + L1i L#8 (64KB) + Core L#8 + PU L#8 (P#8) L2 L#9 (512KB) + L1d L#9 (64KB) + L1i L#9 (64KB) + Core L#9 + PU L#9 (P#9) L2 L#10 (512KB) + L1d L#10 (64KB) + L1i L#10 (64KB) + Core L#10 + PU L#10 (P#10) L2 L#11 (512KB) + L1d L#11 (64KB) + L1i L#11 (64KB) + Core L#11 + PU L#11 (P#11) NUMANode L#3 (P#3 32GB) + L3 L#3 (5118KB) L2 L#12 (512KB) + L1d L#12 (64KB) + L1i L#12 (64KB) + Core L#12 + PU L#12 (P#12) L2 L#13 (512KB) + L1d L#13 (64KB) + L1i L#13 (64KB) + Core L#13 + PU L#13 (P#13) L2 L#14 (512KB) + L1d L#14 (64KB) + L1i L#14 (64KB) + Core L#14 + PU L#14 (P#14) L2 L#15 (512KB) + L1d L#15 (64KB) + L1i L#15 (64KB) + Core L#15 + PU L#15 (P#15) Socket L#2 (64GB) NUMANode L#4 (P#4 32GB) + L3 L#4 (5118KB) L2 L#16 (512KB) + L1d L#16 (64KB) + L1i L#16 (64KB) + Core L#16 + PU L#16 (P#16) L2 L#17 (512KB) + L1d L#17 (64KB) + L1i L#17 (64KB) + Core L#17 + PU L#17 (P#17) L2 L#18 (512KB) + L1d L#18 (64KB) + L1i L#18 (64KB) + Core L#18 + PU L#18 (P#18) L2 L#19 (512KB) + L1d L#19 (64KB) + L1i L#19 (64KB) + Core L#19 + PU L#19 (P#19) NUMANode L#5 (P#5 32GB) + L3 L#5 (5118KB) L2 L#20 (512KB) + L1d L#20 (64KB) + L1i L#20 (64KB) + Core L#20 + PU L#20 (P#20) L2 L#21 (512KB) + L1d L#21 (64KB) + L1i L#21 (64KB) + Core L#21 + PU L#21 (P#21) L2 L#22 (512KB) + L1d L#22 (64KB) + L1i L#22 (64KB) + Core L#22 + PU L#22 (P#22) L2 L#23 (512KB) + L1d L#23 (64KB) + L1i L#23 (64KB) + Core L#23 + PU L#23 (P#23) Socket L#3 (64GB) NUMANode L#6 (P#6 32GB) + L3 L#6 (5118KB) L2 L#24 (512KB) + L1d L#24 (64KB) + L1i L#24 (64KB) + Core L#24 + PU L#24 (P#24) L2 L#25 (512KB) + L1d L#25 (64KB) + L1i L#25 (64KB) + Core L#25 + PU L#25 (P#25) L2 L#26 (512KB) + L1d L#26 (64KB) + L1i L#26 (64KB) + Core L#26 + PU L#26 (P#26) L2 L#27 (512KB) + L1d L#27 (64KB) + L1i L#27 (64KB) + Core L#27 + PU L#27 (P#27) NUMANode L#7 (P#7 32GB) + L3 L#7 (5118KB) L2 L#28 (512KB) + L1d L#28 (64KB) + L1i L#28 (64KB) + Core L#28 + PU L#28 (P#28) L2 L#29 (512KB) + L1d L#29 (64KB) + L1i L#29 (64KB) + Core L#29 + PU L#29 (P#29) L2 L#30 (512KB) + L1d L#30 (64KB) + L1i L#30 (64KB) + Core L#30 + PU L#30 (P#30) L2 L#31 (512KB) + L1d L#31 (64KB) + L1i L#31 (64KB) + Core L#31 + PU L#31 (P#31) the last mpich version with working binding on new systems was mpich2 version 1.4.1 Robert Spir -- Department of Mathematics Faculty of Civil Engineering Slovak University of Technology Bratislava Radlinskeho 11 813 68 Bratislava Slovakia http://www.math.sk

1 0

Re: [mpich-discuss] Fortran/C string passing convention
by William Gropp 01 Feb '13

01 Feb '13

Thanks - when this code was written, all of the Fortran compilers used ints, but that was a long time ago. I'll look into both a robust configure check and updating the code. Bill William Gropp Director, Parallel Computing Institute Deputy Director for Research Institute for Advanced Computing Applications and Technologies Paul and Cynthia Saylor Professor of Computer Science University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign On Feb 1, 2013, at 9:20 AM, Nils Smeds wrote: > Hi all, > > I notice in the mpich source code that Fortran string length arguments are supposed to be int. However, in many compilers this hidden argument is size_t. Below are excerpts from documentation of Intel ifort, GFortran and PathScale. (The last one claims to use int as the string length). In practice using an int here "just works" - at least for strings shorter than 2GB. Since the string length argument is passed by value there is little risk for any errors to occur as it is most likely to be passed in a register so any "additional upper bits" get cleared in the process of the call. Possibly it could be a problem with routines with vary many arguments where arguments are passed over the stack. > > ./src/mpi/romio/adio/include/adio.h > ./src/binding/f77/mpi_fortimpl.h > > #ifdef USE_FORT_MIXED_STR_LEN > #define FORT_MIXED_LEN_DECL , int > #define FORT_END_LEN_DECL > #define FORT_MIXED_LEN(a) , int a > #define FORT_END_LEN(a) > #else > #define FORT_MIXED_LEN_DECL > #define FORT_END_LEN_DECL , int > #define FORT_MIXED_LEN(a) > #define FORT_END_LEN(a) , int a > #endif > > > Intel Fortran > > http://software.intel.com/sites/products/documentation/doclib/stdxe/2013/co… > (Not a perfect example, but the best I could find) I've seen more explicit formulations in earlier Intel manuals. > > http://software.intel.com/en-us/forums/topic/270023 > Is more to the point > > GFortran > > http://www.xgear.eu/callfortranfromc.html > > Fortran functions that receive string variables from C > C > This is slightly more complicated. The Fortran function must be declared at the beginning of the C calling function (e.g. main) like this: > extern void load_(char *string, size_t *len_string); > > Note that we have to pass all variables to Fortran as pointers. Our string variable is already a pointer, but we have to pass the string's length as a pointer too. Although the function name is not case sensitive in Fortran, it gains an underscore in the C declaration and when it is called: > len_string = strlen(string); > > load_(string, &len_string); > Note that in passing the string from C to Fortran we also need to pass the length of the string, hence the use of strlen beforehand (not forgetting to declare the string length variable as a size_trather than an int). > > [ NOTE: The above is likely incorrect in that I believe the declaration should be size_t len_string and the call load_(string, len_string). > The actual arguments are passed by reference but the hidden length arguments are likely passed by value. > (My comment) > ] > > > Pathscale > > http://www.pathscale.com/EKOPath-User-Guide#htoc66 > > Like most Fortran compilers, we represent character strings passed to subprograms with a character pointer, and add an integer length parameter to the end of the call list. > _______________________________________________ > 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] Fortran/C string passing convention
by Jed Brown 01 Feb '13

01 Feb '13

How does one write a configure test to check for this? Only by vendor strings and version numbers? On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Nils Smeds <nils.smeds(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > [* NOTE: *The above is likely incorrect in that I believe the declaration > should be size_t len_string and the call load_(string, len_string). > The actual arguments are passed by reference but the hidden length > arguments are likely passed by value. > (My comment) > ] > Yes, this is certainly the case. What about big-endian architectures using 'size_t' not equal to 'int' and passing enough arguments that the length is not passed in a register?

1 0

src/pm/hydra/tools/topo/hwloc/hwloc/src/topology-xml-libxml.c:224: undefined reference to `xmlReadMemory'
by Sree 01 Feb '13

01 Feb '13

hi I got the error while running make 2nd time, i am running CENTOS 4 x86_64 architecture kernel version 2.6.9-34.0.2 -- ======================= Sreejith M =======================

1 0

Fortran/C string passing convention
by Nils Smeds 01 Feb '13

01 Feb '13

Hi all, I notice in the mpich source code that Fortran string length arguments are supposed to be int. However, in many compilers this hidden argument is size_t. Below are excerpts from documentation of Intel ifort, GFortran and PathScale. (The last one claims to use int as the string length). In practice using an int here "just works" - at least for strings shorter than 2GB. Since the string length argument is passed by value there is little risk for any errors to occur as it is most likely to be passed in a register so any "additional upper bits" get cleared in the process of the call. Possibly it could be a problem with routines with vary many arguments where arguments are passed over the stack. ./src/mpi/romio/adio/include/adio.h ./src/binding/f77/mpi_fortimpl.h #ifdef USE_FORT_MIXED_STR_LEN #define FORT_MIXED_LEN_DECL , int #define FORT_END_LEN_DECL #define FORT_MIXED_LEN(a) , int a #define FORT_END_LEN(a) #else #define FORT_MIXED_LEN_DECL #define FORT_END_LEN_DECL , int #define FORT_MIXED_LEN(a) #define FORT_END_LEN(a) , int a #endif *Intel Fortran * http://software.intel.com/sites/products/documentation/doclib/stdxe/2013/co… (Not a perfect example, but the best I could find) I've seen more explicit formulations in earlier Intel manuals. http://software.intel.com/en-us/forums/topic/270023 Is more to the point *GFortran * http://www.xgear.eu/callfortranfromc.html Fortran functions that receive string variables from C C This is slightly more complicated. The Fortran function must be declared at the beginning of the C calling function (e.g. main) like this: extern void load_(char *string, size_t *len_string); Note that we have to pass all variables to Fortran as pointers. Our string variable is already a pointer, but we have to pass the string's length as a pointer too. Although the function name is not case sensitive in Fortran, it gains an underscore in the C declaration and when it is called: len_string = strlen(string); load_(string, &len_string); Note that in passing the string from C to Fortran we also need to pass the length of the string, hence the use of strlen beforehand (not forgetting to declare the string length variable as a size_trather than an int). [* NOTE: *The above is likely incorrect in that I believe the declaration should be size_t len_string and the call load_(string, len_string). The actual arguments are passed by reference but the hidden length arguments are likely passed by value. (My comment) ] *Pathscale * * * http://www.pathscale.com/EKOPath-User-Guide#htoc66 Like most Fortran compilers, we represent character strings passed to subprograms with a character pointer, and add an integer length parameter to the end of the call list.

1 0

Re: [mpich-discuss] mpich 3.0.2 Ubuntu, Debian and Slackware packages (x86 and amd64)
by Pavan Balaji 31 Jan '13

31 Jan '13

Thanks. I've updated the download page: http://www.mpich.org/downloads/ -- Pavan On 01/31/2013 07:07 AM US Central Time, Marcelo Soares Souza wrote: > mpich 3.0.2 packages > > * Ubuntu 12.04.1 LTS (Precise Pangolin) > > - amd64 > http://www.cebacad.net/files/mpich/ubuntu/mpich-3.0.2/mpich_3.0.2-1ubuntu_a… > > - x86 > http://www.cebacad.net/files/mpich/ubuntu/mpich-3.0.2/mpich_3.0.2-1ubuntu_i… > > * Debian 7.0 (Wheezy) > > - amd64 > http://www.cebacad.net/files/mpich/debian/mpich-3.0.2/mpich_3.0.2-1debian_a… > > - x86 > http://www.cebacad.net/files/mpich/debian/mpich-3.0.2/mpich_3.0.2-1debian_i… > > * Slackware 14.0 > > - amd64 > http://www.cebacad.net/files/mpich/slackware/mpich-3.0.2/mpich-3.0.2-x86_64… > > - x86 > http://www.cebacad.net/files/mpich/slackware/mpich-3.0.2/mpich-3.0.2-i486-g… > > -- > Abraços > Marcelo Soares Souza > http://marcelo.cebacad.net > _______________________________________________ > discuss mailing list discuss(a)mpich.org > To manage subscription options or unsubscribe: > https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > -- Pavan Balaji http://www.mcs.anl.gov/~balaji

1 0

mpich 3.0.2 Ubuntu, Debian and Slackware packages (x86 and amd64)
by Marcelo Soares Souza 31 Jan '13

31 Jan '13

mpich 3.0.2 packages * Ubuntu 12.04.1 LTS (Precise Pangolin) - amd64 http://www.cebacad.net/files/mpich/ubuntu/mpich-3.0.2/mpich_3.0.2-1ubuntu_a… - x86 http://www.cebacad.net/files/mpich/ubuntu/mpich-3.0.2/mpich_3.0.2-1ubuntu_i… * Debian 7.0 (Wheezy) - amd64 http://www.cebacad.net/files/mpich/debian/mpich-3.0.2/mpich_3.0.2-1debian_a… - x86 http://www.cebacad.net/files/mpich/debian/mpich-3.0.2/mpich_3.0.2-1debian_i… * Slackware 14.0 - amd64 http://www.cebacad.net/files/mpich/slackware/mpich-3.0.2/mpich-3.0.2-x86_64… - x86 http://www.cebacad.net/files/mpich/slackware/mpich-3.0.2/mpich-3.0.2-i486-g… -- Abraços Marcelo Soares Souza http://marcelo.cebacad.net

1 0

Re: [mpich-discuss] Weird thing -- MPICH2 on domain
by Jayesh Krishna 30 Jan '13

30 Jan '13

Hi, Let us know how it goes. -Jayesh ----- Original Message ----- From: "Qiguo Jing" <QJing(a)TrinityConsultants.com> To: "Jayesh Krishna" <jayesh(a)mcs.anl.gov> Cc: discuss(a)mpich.org, QJing(a)TrinityConsultants.com Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 4:42:00 PM Subject: Re: [mpich-discuss] Weird thing -- MPICH2 on domain Jayesh, I tried the latest windows version 1.4.1p1 of MPICH2. The same error. Thinking that I may need to modify my codes. It seems that using one processor to create a file then reading the file through all processors will generate such kind of errors. Thanks. From: Jayesh Krishna <jayesh(a)mcs.anl.gov> To: discuss(a)mpich.org, Cc: QJing(a)TrinityConsultants.com Date: 01/29/2013 01:53 PM Subject: Re: [mpich-discuss] Weird thing -- MPICH2 on domain Hi, Can you try out the latest Windows version, 1.4.1p1, of MPICH2 ( http://www.mpich.org/downloads/ )? I don't remember when we changed the default channel on Windows from sock to nemesis. This could be the issue in your case. Please try the latest version available and let us know the results. Regards, Jayesh ----- Original Message ----- From: "Qiguo Jing" <QJing(a)TrinityConsultants.com> Cc: discuss(a)mpich.org, discuss-bounces(a)mpich.org Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 12:44:55 PM Subject: Re: [mpich-discuss] Weird thing -- MPICH2 on domain Scott, With and without the wired connection, laptop has the same hostname, and desktop has the same hostname. But laptop and desktop have different hostnames. I am using mpich2-1.2.1-win-ia32.msi on both machines. Laptop is win7 64, and desktop is win7 32. Another issue is: When I use laptop from home, if I use 3 or less processors, for example "mpiexec -user 0 -np 3 test.exe", it works; however, if I use more than 3 processors, for example, "mpiexec -user 0 -np 4 test.exe", it fails, and the more processors I specified, the earlier I can see it fails. Best, From: "Atchley, Scott" <atchleyes(a)ornl.gov> To: "discuss(a)mpich.org" <discuss(a)mpich.org>, Date: 01/29/2013 11:41 AM Subject: Re: [mpich-discuss] Weird thing -- MPICH2 on domain Sent by: discuss-bounces(a)mpich.org Is it a hostname issue? What is the hostname on both machines with and without the wired connection? What does hydra expect to use? Scott On Jan 29, 2013, at 11:24 AM, Jayesh Krishna <jayesh(a)mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > Hi, > Is there any communication (MPI) between the laptop and the desktop? MPICH2 currently does not support running MPI programs across 32-bit and 64-bit machines. > How are you running your program (The complete mpiexec command and the output. Please copy-paste it from the command window)? > > Regards, > Jayesh > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Qiguo Jing" <QJing(a)TrinityConsultants.com> > To: mpich-discuss(a)mcs.anl.gov > Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 5:16:58 PM > Subject: [mpich-discuss] Weird thing -- MPICH2 on domain > > > All, > > I have been encountering a weird thing, which draw me crazy. I hope someone here can help me. > > I have two computers, a laptop (Windows 7 64 bit) and a desktop (Window 7 32 bit). Both are in company domain, and I use the some information to login. So the MPICH2 registration information are the same for both computers. I developed a parallel FORTRAN program using my laptop. > > 1. If I connect the internet cable on laptop. --> Program works. Results are good. > 2. If I disconnect the internet cable on laptop. --> Program fails, saying Program Exception - access violation > 3. If I connect the internet cable on Desktop. --> Program runs and finishes, but the results are wrong. Slave processors and master processor do not communicate, so that results on slave processor can not be passed to main processor. > 4. If I disconnect the internet cable on Desktop. -> Program works. Results are good. > > > Can someone help? > > > Thanks. > _________________________________________________________________________ > > The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to > which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged > material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or > taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or > entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you > Received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material > from any computer. > _________________________________________________________________________ > _______________________________________________ > 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 _________________________________________________________________________ The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you Received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. _________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss(a)mpich.org To manage subscription options or unsubscribe: https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss _________________________________________________________________________ The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you Received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. _________________________________________________________________________

1 0

Re: [mpich-discuss] Weird thing -- MPICH2 on domain
by Qiguo Jing 29 Jan '13

29 Jan '13

Jayesh, I tried the latest windows version 1.4.1p1 of MPICH2. The same error. Thinking that I may need to modify my codes. It seems that using one processor to create a file then reading the file through all processors will generate such kind of errors. Thanks. From: Jayesh Krishna <jayesh(a)mcs.anl.gov> To: discuss(a)mpich.org, Cc: QJing(a)TrinityConsultants.com Date: 01/29/2013 01:53 PM Subject: Re: [mpich-discuss] Weird thing -- MPICH2 on domain Hi, Can you try out the latest Windows version, 1.4.1p1, of MPICH2 ( http://www.mpich.org/downloads/)? I don't remember when we changed the default channel on Windows from sock to nemesis. This could be the issue in your case. Please try the latest version available and let us know the results. Regards, Jayesh ----- Original Message ----- From: "Qiguo Jing" <QJing(a)TrinityConsultants.com> Cc: discuss(a)mpich.org, discuss-bounces(a)mpich.org Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 12:44:55 PM Subject: Re: [mpich-discuss] Weird thing -- MPICH2 on domain Scott, With and without the wired connection, laptop has the same hostname, and desktop has the same hostname. But laptop and desktop have different hostnames. I am using mpich2-1.2.1-win-ia32.msi on both machines. Laptop is win7 64, and desktop is win7 32. Another issue is: When I use laptop from home, if I use 3 or less processors, for example "mpiexec -user 0 -np 3 test.exe", it works; however, if I use more than 3 processors, for example, "mpiexec -user 0 -np 4 test.exe", it fails, and the more processors I specified, the earlier I can see it fails. Best, From: "Atchley, Scott" <atchleyes(a)ornl.gov> To: "discuss(a)mpich.org" <discuss(a)mpich.org>, Date: 01/29/2013 11:41 AM Subject: Re: [mpich-discuss] Weird thing -- MPICH2 on domain Sent by: discuss-bounces(a)mpich.org Is it a hostname issue? What is the hostname on both machines with and without the wired connection? What does hydra expect to use? Scott On Jan 29, 2013, at 11:24 AM, Jayesh Krishna <jayesh(a)mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > Hi, > Is there any communication (MPI) between the laptop and the desktop? MPICH2 currently does not support running MPI programs across 32-bit and 64-bit machines. > How are you running your program (The complete mpiexec command and the output. Please copy-paste it from the command window)? > > Regards, > Jayesh > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Qiguo Jing" <QJing(a)TrinityConsultants.com> > To: mpich-discuss(a)mcs.anl.gov > Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 5:16:58 PM > Subject: [mpich-discuss] Weird thing -- MPICH2 on domain > > > All, > > I have been encountering a weird thing, which draw me crazy. I hope someone here can help me. > > I have two computers, a laptop (Windows 7 64 bit) and a desktop (Window 7 32 bit). Both are in company domain, and I use the some information to login. So the MPICH2 registration information are the same for both computers. I developed a parallel FORTRAN program using my laptop. > > 1. If I connect the internet cable on laptop. --> Program works. Results are good. > 2. If I disconnect the internet cable on laptop. --> Program fails, saying Program Exception - access violation > 3. If I connect the internet cable on Desktop. --> Program runs and finishes, but the results are wrong. Slave processors and master processor do not communicate, so that results on slave processor can not be passed to main processor. > 4. If I disconnect the internet cable on Desktop. -> Program works. Results are good. > > > Can someone help? > > > Thanks. > _________________________________________________________________________ > > The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to > which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged > material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or > taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or > entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you > Received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material > from any computer. > _________________________________________________________________________ > _______________________________________________ > 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 _________________________________________________________________________ The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you Received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. _________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss(a)mpich.org To manage subscription options or unsubscribe: https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss _________________________________________________________________________ The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you Received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. _________________________________________________________________________

1 0

Re: [mpich-discuss] Weird thing -- MPICH2 on domain
by Jayesh Krishna 29 Jan '13

29 Jan '13

Hi, Can you try out the latest Windows version, 1.4.1p1, of MPICH2 (http://www.mpich.org/downloads/)? I don't remember when we changed the default channel on Windows from sock to nemesis. This could be the issue in your case. Please try the latest version available and let us know the results. Regards, Jayesh ----- Original Message ----- From: "Qiguo Jing" <QJing(a)TrinityConsultants.com> Cc: discuss(a)mpich.org, discuss-bounces(a)mpich.org Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 12:44:55 PM Subject: Re: [mpich-discuss] Weird thing -- MPICH2 on domain Scott, With and without the wired connection, laptop has the same hostname, and desktop has the same hostname. But laptop and desktop have different hostnames. I am using mpich2-1.2.1-win-ia32.msi on both machines. Laptop is win7 64, and desktop is win7 32. Another issue is: When I use laptop from home, if I use 3 or less processors, for example "mpiexec -user 0 -np 3 test.exe", it works; however, if I use more than 3 processors, for example, "mpiexec -user 0 -np 4 test.exe", it fails, and the more processors I specified, the earlier I can see it fails. Best, From: "Atchley, Scott" <atchleyes(a)ornl.gov> To: "discuss(a)mpich.org" <discuss(a)mpich.org>, Date: 01/29/2013 11:41 AM Subject: Re: [mpich-discuss] Weird thing -- MPICH2 on domain Sent by: discuss-bounces(a)mpich.org Is it a hostname issue? What is the hostname on both machines with and without the wired connection? What does hydra expect to use? Scott On Jan 29, 2013, at 11:24 AM, Jayesh Krishna <jayesh(a)mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > Hi, > Is there any communication (MPI) between the laptop and the desktop? MPICH2 currently does not support running MPI programs across 32-bit and 64-bit machines. > How are you running your program (The complete mpiexec command and the output. Please copy-paste it from the command window)? > > Regards, > Jayesh > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Qiguo Jing" <QJing(a)TrinityConsultants.com> > To: mpich-discuss(a)mcs.anl.gov > Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 5:16:58 PM > Subject: [mpich-discuss] Weird thing -- MPICH2 on domain > > > All, > > I have been encountering a weird thing, which draw me crazy. I hope someone here can help me. > > I have two computers, a laptop (Windows 7 64 bit) and a desktop (Window 7 32 bit). Both are in company domain, and I use the some information to login. So the MPICH2 registration information are the same for both computers. I developed a parallel FORTRAN program using my laptop. > > 1. If I connect the internet cable on laptop. --> Program works. Results are good. > 2. If I disconnect the internet cable on laptop. --> Program fails, saying Program Exception - access violation > 3. If I connect the internet cable on Desktop. --> Program runs and finishes, but the results are wrong. Slave processors and master processor do not communicate, so that results on slave processor can not be passed to main processor. > 4. If I disconnect the internet cable on Desktop. -> Program works. Results are good. > > > Can someone help? > > > Thanks. > _________________________________________________________________________ > > The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to > which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged > material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or > taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or > entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you > Received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material > from any computer. > _________________________________________________________________________ > _______________________________________________ > 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 _________________________________________________________________________ The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you Received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. _________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss(a)mpich.org To manage subscription options or unsubscribe: https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

1 0