[MPICH] Intel 10.1

[Rajeev Thakur]

You can also run the entire MPICH2 test suite by running "make testing" in
the top-level directory. (Can take an hour or more.)

Rajeev 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-mpich-discuss at mcs.anl.gov 
> [mailto:owner-mpich-discuss at mcs.anl.gov] On Behalf Of Mike Colonno
> Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:38 PM
> To: Pavan Balaji
> Cc: mpich-discuss at mcs.anl.gov
> Subject: RE: [MPICH] Intel 10.1
> 
> 
>    Simple cases, like the test cases that come with MPICH 
> distributions, seem to work fine for n = anything. Any more 
> sophisticated code works for n = small number (8 is typical) 
> but fails for n > this number. This is independent of how the 
> processes are distributed (number of processes / server). I 
> have tried several different version of MPICH and MPICH2, 
> including the one you mentioned, but all have the same 
> result. This leads me to believe the issue lies with the 
> compiler(s). We're using x64 servers, 2 dual-core Xeons per 
> machine, RHEL 4.3 and 4.5 (upgrading OS had no effect). 
>  
>    Thanks,
>    ~Mike C.
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From: Pavan Balaji [mailto:balaji at mcs.anl.gov]
> Sent: Wed 2/13/2008 7:22 PM
> To: Mike Colonno
> Cc: mpich-discuss at mcs.anl.gov
> Subject: Re: [MPICH] Intel 10.1
> 
> 
> 
> Mike,
> 
> We internally use Intel 9.1. We are still waiting on a site 
> license for Intel 10.1. Are you using mpich2-1.0.6p1? Also, 
> what hardware platform are you running these tests on?
> 
> Can you try a simple test and see if it works fine:
> 
>   $ mpiexec hostname
> 
>   -- Pavan
> 
> On 02/13/2008 08:55 PM, Mike Colonno wrote:
> >    Hi folks ~
> > 
> >    Has anyone out there had any luck building MPICH and / 
> or MPICH2 (and subsequent MPI applications) with Intel 10.1 
> compilers (C++ and Fortran)? If so, please forward me the 
> details (flags, versions, OS, etc.). All of my MPI programs 
> suffer "collective abort" errors killed by signal 9 or 11 
> (with essentially no repeatable pattern between the two) 
> which are likely caused by seg. faults behind the scenes.  
> These codes worked great on older hardware / compiler 
> versions and despite a large number of experiments I have 
> been unable to find the secret. Compiled in sequential mode 
> (without MPI) they all function well.
> > 
> >    Thanks,
> >    ~Mike C.
> > 
> >
> 
> --
> Pavan Balaji
> http://www.mcs.anl.gov/~balaji
> 
> 
>