compiling PETSc with Intel MKL 10.0.1.14

[Satish Balay]

Ok - for one you are on a x86_64 machine. So
--with-blas-lapack-dir=/opt/intel/mkl/10.0.3.020/lib/64 is incorrect.

--with-blas-lapack-dir=/opt/intel/mkl/10.0.3.020/lib/em64t would be
the correct thing [or --with-blas-lapack-dir=/opt/intel/mkl/10.0.3.020
- so that configure determines the correct subdir in lib]

Note: intel calls 'x86_64' [i.e AMD64]  as 'em64t', and IA64 [i.e itanium] as '64'


However currently you get link time warnings. The exectuable gets
created - so it should run correctly. Can you confirm this? [I don't
see any errors in the output you sent.]

And I don't think you'll be able to get rid of these warnings. Your
compiler is already configured to look into both locations.

run 'mpicc -v foo.c' [on any simple c code] - and you'll see the
following link paths.

 "-L/opt/intel/mkl/10.0.3.020/lib/64" "-L/opt/intel/mkl/10.0.3.020/lib/em64t"

[It should not be linking agaings '64' version. It should only use 'em64t' version]

Satish

On Tue, 3 Feb 2009, Randall Mackie wrote:

> Hi Satish,
> 
> I compiled PETSC with the following options:
> 
> ./configure PETSC_ARCH=linux-intel-opt --with-fortran-kernels=generic
> --with-blas-lapack-dir
> =/opt/intel/mkl/10.0.3.020/lib/64 --with-scalar-type=complex
> --with-debugging=0
> 
> PETSc compiled just fine, but when I tried to compile my application, or run
> the tests
> within PETSC, it bombed out looking for the MKL libraries like:
> 
> 
> mpif90 -O   -o d3inv_DA_1_1_4_petsc ...  ,-rpath,/opt/intel/mkl/
> 10.0.3.020/lib/64 -L/opt/intel/mkl/10.0.3.020/lib/64 -lmkl_lapack -lmkl
> -lguide -lpthread -lPEPCF9r/lib64 -L/usr/mpi/intel/mvapich-1.0.1/lib/shared
> -L/usr/mpi/intel/mvapich-1.0.1/lib -ldl -lmpich -libverbs -libumad
> -libcommon -lpthread -lrt -L/opt/intel/mkl/
> 10.0.3.020/libopt/intel/mkl/10.0.3.020/lib/em64t ......
> 
> ld: skipping incompatible
> /opt/intel/mkl/10.0.3.020/lib/64/libmkl_lapack.sowhen searching for
> -lmkl_lapack
> etc.
> 
> I'll try Paul's method of specifying the exact libraries to be included. If
> you want, I can
> still send you the configure log.
> 
> Randy
> 
> On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Satish Balay <balay at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> 
> > I just successfully compiled petsc-dev [which is almost same as
> > petsc-3.0.0-p3] & MLK successfully with both intel & gnu compilers.
> >
> > ./configure
> > --with-blas-lapack-dir=/gfs/software/software/intel/compilersuite/10.1/mkl/10.0.011
> > --with-mpi=0 PETSC_ARCH=linux-mkl
> >
> >
> > ./configure
> > --with-blas-lapack-dir=/gfs/software/software/intel/compilersuite/10.1/mkl/10.0.011
> > --with-mpi=0 PETSC_ARCH=linux-icc-mkl CC=icc FC=ifort
> >
> > What problems are you encountering? Send configure.log to petsc-maint..
> >
> > Satish
> >
> > On Tue, 3 Feb 2009, Randall Mackie wrote:
> >
> > > Paul,
> > >
> > > Have you tried this with Petsc 3.0.0? I just tried to compile it using
> > > MKL 10.0.3.020, and I am having the same issue you specified below, in
> > that
> > > Petsc is looking for -lmkl_lapack -lmkl -lguide etc and the compilation
> > > doesn't work.
> > >
> > > Randy
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Paul T. Bauman wrote:
> > > > Sorry this took so long to get around to doing. So it turns out that
> > there's
> > > > a newer version of 2.3.3p13 posted at the PETSc ftp server. This worked
> > > > flawlessly with the new MKL. I guess it got fixed and checked-in, but
> > not
> > > > under a new patch?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > Paul
> > > >
> > > > Barry Smith wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >   Please send the configure.log to petsc-maint at mcs.anl.gov
> > > > >
> > > > >    Barry
> > > > >
> > > > > On Aug 15, 2008, at 1:39 PM, Paul T. Bauman wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Was there ever a fix/workaround introduced for this? I'm using
> > 2.3.3p13
> > > > > > and I'm having trouble getting the config to recognize mkl
> > 10.0.3.020.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Paul
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Barry Smith wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >  Could you email to petsc-maint at mcs.anl.gov ALL the messages as
> > to
> > > > > > > what goes wrong with
> > > > > > > our current linking so we can fix it?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >   Thanks
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >   Barry
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Jun 18, 2008, at 3:32 PM, Randall Mackie wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > We've upgraded Intel MKL to version 10.0, but in this version,
> > Intel
> > > > > > > > has
> > > > > > > > changed how libraries are suppose to be linked. For example,
> > the
> > > > > > > > libmkl_lapack.a
> > > > > > > > is a dummy library, but that's what the PETSc configure script
> > looks
> > > > > > > > for.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The documentation says, for example, to compile LAPACK in the
> > static
> > > > > > > > case,
> > > > > > > > use libmkl_lapack.a libmkl_em64t.a
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > and in the layered pure case to use
> > > > > > > > libmkl_intel_lp64.a libmkl_intel_thread.a libmkl_core.a
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > However, the PETSC configuration wants -lmkl_lapack -lmkl
> > -lguide
> > > > > > > > -lpthread
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Any suggestions are appreciated.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Randy
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>