From mehdi.alishahi at gmail.com Tue Jan 1 10:58:15 2008 From: mehdi.alishahi at gmail.com (Mehdi) Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2008 10:58:15 -0600 Subject: [Users] Mehdi sent you a friend request on Yaari... Message-ID: <9dd2b5380402711a1a074c29f6ba63ba@localhost.localdomain> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.cactuscode.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20080101/9e49a01f/attachment.html From mehdi.alishahi at gmail.com Tue Jan 1 10:58:29 2008 From: mehdi.alishahi at gmail.com (Mehdi) Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2008 10:58:29 -0600 Subject: [Users] Mehdi sent you a friend request on Yaari... Message-ID: <9099fcfc6396c042eb2b41295949408c@localhost.localdomain> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.cactuscode.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20080101/bfbc3097/attachment.html From mehdi.alishahi at gmail.com Tue Jan 1 10:59:00 2008 From: mehdi.alishahi at gmail.com (Mehdi) Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2008 10:59:00 -0600 Subject: [Users] Mehdi sent you a friend request on Yaari... Message-ID: <72aa8ea5cb3478caeb56a16b0cfac64f@localhost.localdomain> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.cactuscode.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20080101/d5a6f04e/attachment.html From mehdi.alishahi at gmail.com Tue Jan 1 10:59:09 2008 From: mehdi.alishahi at gmail.com (Mehdi) Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2008 10:59:09 -0600 Subject: [Users] Mehdi sent you a friend request on Yaari... Message-ID: <443bf99601ab34e7b88c21f9b9b93ec6@localhost.localdomain> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.cactuscode.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20080101/1e000bfe/attachment.html From reisswig at aei.mpg.de Wed Jan 16 06:26:26 2008 From: reisswig at aei.mpg.de (Christian Reisswig) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 13:26:26 +0100 Subject: [Users] problem with ifort 10 compiler Message-ID: <200801161326.26226.reisswig@aei.mpg.de> Hi, when I try to compile Cactus, I get problems compiling Fortran code, since Cactus sets an optimization option "-xN". This option doesn't seem to be supported by the Intel Fortran 10 compiler. ifort -help reveals: v10: -x generate specialized code to run exclusively on processors indicated by as described below W Intel Pentium 4 and compatible Intel processors P Intel(R) Core(TM) Duo processors, Intel(R) Core(TM) Solo processors, Intel Pentium 4 and compatible Intel(R) processors with Streaming SIMD Extensions 3 (SSE3) instruction support T Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo processors, Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad processors, and Intel(R) Xeon(R) processors with SSSE3 O Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo processors. Code is expected to run properly on any processor that supports SSE3, SSE2 and SSE instruction sets generate specialized code to run exclusively on processors indicated by as described above. So I guess the -xN option has to be replaced by -xW. cheers, Christian -- Christian Reisswig Max-Planck-Institut fuer Gravitationsphysik Albert-Einstein-Institut Potsdam / Golm Astrophysical Relativity (Numerical Relativity Group) office: +49 331 567 7179 From schnetter at cct.lsu.edu Wed Jan 16 07:31:41 2008 From: schnetter at cct.lsu.edu (Erik Schnetter) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 07:31:41 -0600 Subject: [Users] problem with ifort 10 compiler In-Reply-To: <200801161326.26226.reisswig@aei.mpg.de> References: <200801161326.26226.reisswig@aei.mpg.de> Message-ID: <05A71F79-E37D-41B3-9508-03851F773A82@cct.lsu.edu> On Jan 16, 2008, at 06:26:26, Christian Reisswig wrote: > Hi, > > when I try to compile Cactus, I get problems compiling Fortran > code, since > Cactus sets an optimization option "-xN". > This option doesn't seem to be supported by the Intel Fortran 10 > compiler. > > ifort -help reveals: > > v10: > > -x generate specialized code to run exclusively on processors > indicated by as described below > W Intel Pentium 4 and compatible Intel processors > P Intel(R) Core(TM) Duo processors, Intel(R) Core(TM) Solo > processors, > Intel Pentium 4 and compatible Intel(R) processors with > Streaming > SIMD Extensions 3 (SSE3) instruction support > T Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo processors, Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad > processors, and Intel(R) Xeon(R) processors with SSSE3 > O Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo processors. Code is expected to run > properly > on any processor that supports SSE3, SSE2 and SSE > instruction sets > > > > K Intel Pentium III and compatible Intel processors > W Intel Pentium 4 and compatible Intel processors > N Intel Pentium 4 and compatible Intel processors. Enables new > optimizations in addition to Intel processor-specific > optimizations > P Intel Core(TM) Duo processors, Intel Core(TM) Solo > processors, Intel > Pentium 4 and compatible Intel processors with Streaming SIMD > Extensions 3 (SSE3) instruction support > B Intel Pentium M and compatible Intel processors > -x generate specialized code to run exclusively on processors > indicated by as described above. > > > So I guess the -xN option has to be replaced by -xW. I think the option should be omitted. Which of these options should be used depends on the system; Cactus should either autoconfigure the system and optimise for the system where it is compiled, or should (by default) produce binaries which run everywhere. -xW seems to break for Pentium III systems -- I don't think they are in widespread use, but you never know. We could use -axP, which generates code that runs everywhere but is optimised for modern machines. For example, -fast also implies -xP. -erik -- Erik Schnetter http://www.cct.lsu.edu/ ~eschnett/ My email is as private as my paper mail. I therefore support encrypting and signing email messages. Get my PGP key from www.keyserver.net. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: PGP.sig Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 186 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://www.cactuscode.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20080116/4ec23785/attachment.bin From tradke at aei.mpg.de Fri Jan 18 11:18:50 2008 From: tradke at aei.mpg.de (Thomas Radke) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 18:18:50 +0100 Subject: [Users] problem with ifort 10 compiler In-Reply-To: <05A71F79-E37D-41B3-9508-03851F773A82@cct.lsu.edu> References: <200801161326.26226.reisswig@aei.mpg.de> <05A71F79-E37D-41B3-9508-03851F773A82@cct.lsu.edu> Message-ID: <4790DF7A.1030601@aei.mpg.de> Erik Schnetter wrote: > On Jan 16, 2008, at 06:26:26, Christian Reisswig wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> when I try to compile Cactus, I get problems compiling Fortran code, >> since >> Cactus sets an optimization option "-xN". >> This option doesn't seem to be supported by the Intel Fortran 10 >> compiler. >> So I guess the -xN option has to be replaced by -xW. > > > > I think the option should be omitted. Which of these options should be > used depends on the system; Cactus should either autoconfigure the > system and optimise for the system where it is compiled, or should (by > default) produce binaries which run everywhere. -xW seems to break for > Pentium III systems -- I don't think they are in widespread use, but > you never know. > > We could use -axP, which generates code that runs everywhere but is > optimised for modern machines. For example, -fast also implies -xP. I suggest to omit any processor-dependent optimisation flags and just use '-O2 -ip' (same Cactus default optimisation flags as for C/C++ code). I just ran a BSSN_MoL benchmark comparing a '-O2 -ip' configuration against '-O2 -xN -ip'. It showed no difference in runtime on Damiana. -- Cheers, Thomas. From reisswig at aei.mpg.de Fri Jan 18 11:32:03 2008 From: reisswig at aei.mpg.de (Christian Reisswig) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 18:32:03 +0100 Subject: [Users] problem with ifort 10 compiler In-Reply-To: <4790DF7A.1030601@aei.mpg.de> References: <200801161326.26226.reisswig@aei.mpg.de> <05A71F79-E37D-41B3-9508-03851F773A82@cct.lsu.edu> <4790DF7A.1030601@aei.mpg.de> Message-ID: <200801181832.03939.reisswig@aei.mpg.de> Hi, but in my config-file I did not specify any processor-dependant optimization flags. I think this is set by Cactus during the configuration. Thomas, you could try to take my config-file on damiana /home/reisswig/.cactus/ and test it whether it will set this flag or not. (On my laptop by the way it is using the same flag and again I did not specify that flag explicitly (I did not even know about it beforehands)). I think this is something that needs to be fixed in the Cactus configuration-scripts itself when no optimization flags are given at all and Cactus needs to guess them. cheers, Christian On Friday 18 January 2008 18:18:50 Thomas Radke wrote: > Erik Schnetter wrote: > > On Jan 16, 2008, at 06:26:26, Christian Reisswig wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> when I try to compile Cactus, I get problems compiling Fortran code, > >> since > >> Cactus sets an optimization option "-xN". > >> This option doesn't seem to be supported by the Intel Fortran 10 > >> compiler. > >> So I guess the -xN option has to be replaced by -xW. > > > > I think the option should be omitted. Which of these options should be > > used depends on the system; Cactus should either autoconfigure the > > system and optimise for the system where it is compiled, or should (by > > default) produce binaries which run everywhere. -xW seems to break for > > Pentium III systems -- I don't think they are in widespread use, but > > you never know. > > > > We could use -axP, which generates code that runs everywhere but is > > optimised for modern machines. For example, -fast also implies -xP. > > I suggest to omit any processor-dependent optimisation flags and just > use '-O2 -ip' (same Cactus default optimisation flags as for C/C++ code). > > I just ran a BSSN_MoL benchmark comparing a '-O2 -ip' configuration > against '-O2 -xN -ip'. It showed no difference in runtime on Damiana. -- Christian Reisswig Max-Planck-Institut fuer Gravitationsphysik Albert-Einstein-Institut Potsdam / Golm Astrophysical Relativity (Numerical Relativity Group) office: +49 331 567 7179 From tradke at aei.mpg.de Fri Jan 18 11:45:58 2008 From: tradke at aei.mpg.de (Thomas Radke) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 18:45:58 +0100 Subject: [Users] problem with ifort 10 compiler In-Reply-To: <200801181832.03939.reisswig@aei.mpg.de> References: <200801161326.26226.reisswig@aei.mpg.de> <05A71F79-E37D-41B3-9508-03851F773A82@cct.lsu.edu> <4790DF7A.1030601@aei.mpg.de> <200801181832.03939.reisswig@aei.mpg.de> Message-ID: <4790E5D6.1020006@aei.mpg.de> Christian Reisswig wrote: > Hi, > > but in my config-file I did not specify any processor-dependant optimization > flags. I think this is set by Cactus during the configuration. > Thomas, you could try to take my config-file on > damiana /home/reisswig/.cactus/ and test it whether it will set this flag or > not. > (On my laptop by the way it is using the same flag and again I did not specify > that flag explicitly (I did not even know about it beforehands)). > > I think this is something that needs to be fixed in the Cactus > configuration-scripts itself when no optimization flags are given at all and > Cactus needs to guess them. Yes, that's what I was suggesting. Not specifying optimisation options explicitely by a user (which would otherwise overwrite the default settings) should always yield in a valid set of compiler options to successfully build a configuration and run the executable. Currently this is broken on Damiana; it needs to be fixed in the known-architectures file for Linux. -- Cheers, Thomas.