[mpich-discuss] MPICH 3.2.1 build error with icc+ifort: undefined reference to `_Static_assert'
Jeff Hammond
jeff.science at gmail.com
Thu Jun 14 15:04:49 CDT 2018
It’s shocking that a compliant Fortran 90 code doesn’t compile with GCC 8.
Have you reported the bugs to GCC bugzilla?
Jeff
On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 12:56 PM Gus Correa <gus at ldeo.columbia.edu> wrote:
> Hi Jeff
>
> This is actually to compile a Fortran90 program,
> which uses MPI and another library (netCDF) through
> Fortran modules (use MPI, use netcdf).
> The code doesn't compile under gfortran, only with ifort.
> Optimization and efficiency is not the top priority,
> if we can get the code to compile and run that is fine.
>
> Since Fortran modules are compiler-dependent, I need to
> build MPICH (and netCDF) with the Intel compilers.
> I have done this for a variety of compilers and compiler
> versions for our clusters (before Infiniband with MPICH,
> then with Open MPI),
> but this turn it is for a single workstation,
> hence MPICH is a good fit.
>
> That Fortran90 modules are compiler-dependent really sucks,
> and is the negation of software inter-operability
> and portability.
> It may serve well the compiler vendors,
> but for users it is just a pain.
>
> Anyway, your suggestion to tweak with that include file worked,
> and I could build MPICH 3.2.1 with the archaic Intel 2012.
>
> Many thanks!
> Gus Correa
>
>
> On 06/13/2018 11:34 PM, Jeff Hammond wrote:
> > I don’t know for sure, but I’d guess that GCC 8 or Clang 6 optimizes
> > better than ICC 12 and the likelihood goes up the newer the hardware.
> > Intel people contribute to the OSS compilers, particularly when it comes
> > to architecture-specific optimizations.
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 5:02 PM Jeff Hammond <jeff.science at gmail.com
> > <mailto:jeff.science at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 4:44 PM, Gus Correa <gus at ldeo.columbia.edu
> > <mailto:gus at ldeo.columbia.edu>> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On 06/13/2018 07:36 PM, Jeff Hammond wrote:
> >
> > Why don't you just use a newer ICC? September 28, 2012 was
> > a long time ago...
> >
> > > Jeff
> >
> > The cost of a new license. :(
> >
> >
> > Do any of the options on
> > https://software.intel.com/en-us/qualify-for-free-software work for
> you?
> >
> > It is temporary, but you can get Intel 19 beta for free
> > (
> https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-parallel-studio-xe-2019-beta
> ).
> >
> > What code are you developing?
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 4:32 PM, Gus Correa
> > <gus at ldeo.columbia.edu <mailto:gus at ldeo.columbia.edu>
> > <mailto:gus at ldeo.columbia.edu
> > <mailto:gus at ldeo.columbia.edu>>> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you Jeff and Min!
> >
> > Would you know if MPICH 3.2 has the same issue?
> > I would rather use an older version instead, as long as
> > it builds.
> >
> > Many thanks,
> > Gus Correa
> >
> > On 06/13/2018 06:34 PM, Min Si wrote:
> >
> > I was just creating the issue on MPICH github when
> > Jeff replied.
> >
> > Please use this issue to keep track:
> > https://github.com/pmodels/mpich/issues/3178
> > <https://github.com/pmodels/mpich/issues/3178>
> >
> > Min
> > On 2018/06/13 15:19, Jeff Hammond wrote:
> >
> > _Static_assert comes from C11.
> >
> > src/include/mpir_assert.h does a direct test
> > for C11 support
> > based upon the GCC version, which is unsafe
> > since ICC (and
> > other non-GCC compilers) define these macros.
> >
> > /* GCC 4.6 added support for _Static_assert:
> > * http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.6/changes.html
> > <http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.6/changes.html> */
> > #if (__GNUC__ > 4 || (__GNUC__ == 4 &&
> > __GNUC_MINOR__ >= 6))
> > && !defined __cplusplus
> > #define HAVE_C11__STATIC_ASSERT 1
> > #endif
> >
> > MPICH needs to test for _Static_assert properly
> > using
> > configure. You should file a GitHub issue to
> > track this.
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 2:33 PM, Gus Correa
> > <gus at ldeo.columbia.edu
> > <mailto:gus at ldeo.columbia.edu> <mailto:gus at ldeo.columbia.edu
> > <mailto:gus at ldeo.columbia.edu>>
> > <mailto:gus at ldeo.columbia.edu
> > <mailto:gus at ldeo.columbia.edu>
> >
> > <mailto:gus at ldeo.columbia.edu
> > <mailto:gus at ldeo.columbia.edu>>>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi MPICH experts
> >
> > I am trying to build MPICH 3.2.1 with Intel
> > compilers (icc, ifort).
> > C++ is disabled.
> >
> > The configuration step goes well,
> > but make fails,
> > after a lot of stuff is compiled,
> > with the error below (undefined reference
> to
> > `_Static_assert').
> >
> > FYI, the OS is Linux Fedora Core 26:
> >
> > Linux 4.15.17-200.fc26.x86_64 #1 SMP Thu
> > Apr 12
> > 18:28:26 UTC 2018
> > x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
> >
> > The Intel compiler version is 12.1.6:
> > ifort (IFORT) 12.1.6 20120928
> > icc (ICC) 12.1.6 20120928
> >
> > The Intel compiler environment is set the
> > standard way
> > recommended by Intel:
> >
> > source /path/to/intel/bin/compilervars.sh
> > intel64
> >
> >
> > Any help is appreciated.
> > Gus Correa
> >
> > ****** make errror message
> > *************************************
> > make[2]: Entering directory
> >
> >
> '/home/sw/mpich/inst/3.2.1/mpich-3.2.1/build_intel-2011.13.367'
> > CCLD src/env/mpivars
> >
> > lib/.libs/libmpi.a(lib_libmpi_la-ch3_progress.o): In
> > function
> > `MPIDI_CH3I_Shm_send_progress':
> >
> >
> ../src/mpid/ch3/channels/nemesis/src/ch3_progress.c:(.text+0x1ea2):
> > undefined
> > reference to `_Static_assert'
> >
> > lib/.libs/libmpi.a(lib_libmpi_la-ch3i_eagernoncontig.o): In
> > function `MPIDI_CH3I_SendNoncontig':
> >
> >
> ../src/mpid/ch3/channels/nemesis/src/ch3i_eagernoncontig.c:(.text+0x1d3):
> > undefined reference to `_Static_assert'
> > make[2]: *** [Makefile:19701:
> > src/env/mpivars] Error 1
> > make[2]: Leaving directory
> >
> >
> '/home/sw/mpich/inst/3.2.1/mpich-3.2.1/build_intel-2011.13.367'
> > make[1]: *** [Makefile:38608:
> > all-recursive] Error 1
> > make[1]: Leaving directory
> >
> >
> '/home/sw/mpich/inst/3.2.1/mpich-3.2.1/build_intel-2011.13.367'
> > make: *** [Makefile:10337: all] Error 2
> >
> >
> *******************************************************************
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > discuss mailing list discuss at mpich.org
> > <mailto:discuss at mpich.org>
> > <mailto:discuss at mpich.org
> > <mailto:discuss at mpich.org>> <mailto:discuss at mpich.org
> > <mailto:discuss at mpich.org>
> > <mailto:discuss at mpich.org
> > <mailto:discuss at mpich.org>>>
> > To manage subscription options or
> unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> > <
> https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
> >
> > <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> > <
> https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -- Jeff Hammond
> > jeff.science at gmail.com <mailto:jeff.science at gmail.com>
> > <mailto:jeff.science at gmail.com <mailto:
> jeff.science at gmail.com>>
> > <mailto:jeff.science at gmail.com
> > <mailto:jeff.science at gmail.com>
> > <mailto:jeff.science at gmail.com <mailto:
> jeff.science at gmail.com>>>
> > http://jeffhammond.github.io/
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > discuss mailing listdiscuss at mpich.org
> > <mailto:listdiscuss at mpich.org>
> > <mailto:listdiscuss at mpich.org
> > <mailto:listdiscuss at mpich.org>>
> > To manage subscription options or unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> > <
> https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > discuss mailing list discuss at mpich.org
> > <mailto:discuss at mpich.org> <mailto:discuss at mpich.org
> > <mailto:discuss at mpich.org>>
> > To manage subscription options or unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> > <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > discuss mailing list discuss at mpich.org
> > <mailto:discuss at mpich.org> <mailto:discuss at mpich.org
> > <mailto:discuss at mpich.org>>
> > To manage subscription options or unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> > <https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jeff Hammond
> > jeff.science at gmail.com <mailto:jeff.science at gmail.com>
> > <mailto:jeff.science at gmail.com <mailto:
> jeff.science at gmail.com>>
> > http://jeffhammond.github.io/
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > discuss mailing list discuss at mpich.org
> > <mailto:discuss at mpich.org>
> > To manage subscription options or unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jeff Hammond
> > jeff.science at gmail.com <mailto:jeff.science at gmail.com>
> > http://jeffhammond.github.io/
> >
> > --
> > Jeff Hammond
> > jeff.science at gmail.com <mailto:jeff.science at gmail.com>
> > http://jeffhammond.github.io/
>
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list discuss at mpich.org
> To manage subscription options or unsubscribe:
> https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
--
Jeff Hammond
jeff.science at gmail.com
http://jeffhammond.github.io/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mpich.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20180614/caa3a195/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list discuss at mpich.org
To manage subscription options or unsubscribe:
https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
More information about the discuss
mailing list