Skip to content

{bio,math}[intel/2017a] PHAST v1.4, CLAPACK v3.2.1#5096

Merged
verdurin merged 1 commit intoeasybuilders:developfrom
boegel:20170905214949_new_pr_PHAST14
Sep 6, 2017
Merged

{bio,math}[intel/2017a] PHAST v1.4, CLAPACK v3.2.1#5096
verdurin merged 1 commit intoeasybuilders:developfrom
boegel:20170905214949_new_pr_PHAST14

Conversation

@boegel
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@boegel boegel commented Sep 5, 2017

(created using eb --new-pr)

@boegel
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

boegel commented Sep 5, 2017

Test report by @boegel
SUCCESS
Build succeeded for 2 out of 2 (2 easyconfigs in this PR)
node2044.delcatty.os - Linux centos linux 7.3.1611, Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2670 0 @ 2.60GHz, Python 2.7.5
See https://gist.github.com/2a9e184daabc3e988bf98fe211eb54ae for a full test report.

@boegel
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

boegel commented Sep 5, 2017

Test report by @boegel
SUCCESS
Build succeeded for 2 out of 2 (2 easyconfigs in this PR)
node2439.golett.os - Linux centos linux 7.3.1611, Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2680 v3 @ 2.50GHz, Python 2.7.5
See https://gist.github.com/41a495949f3f1a530e7941302fb1228b for a full test report.

@boegel boegel added this to the 3.4.0 milestone Sep 5, 2017
@verdurin
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

verdurin commented Sep 6, 2017

Test report by @verdurin
FAILED
Build succeeded for 0 out of 2 (2 easyconfigs in this PR)
ca005.camp.thecrick.org - Linux centos linux 7.3.1611, Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2640 v3 @ 2.60GHz, Python 2.7.5
See https://gist.github.com/872c9f755664a0d32580bb3624a60407 for a full test report.

@boegel
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

boegel commented Sep 6, 2017

@verdurin Hmm...

./xeigtstz < nep.in > znep.out 2>&1
/bin/sh: line 1: 17036 Segmentation fault      ./xeigtstz < nep.in > znep.out 2>&1
make[1]: *** [znep.out] Error 139
make[1]: Leaving directory `/camp/apps/eb/review/software/CLAPACK/3.2.1-intel-2017a/TESTING'
make: *** [lapack_testing] Error 2

Any clues in the znep.out file?

@verdurin
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

verdurin commented Sep 6, 2017

@boegel It's empty, I'm afraid.

@boegel
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

boegel commented Sep 6, 2017

@verdurin Can you show the output of ulimit -a on your end? I suspect there may be a limitation there that may cause this. Here's mine:

$ ulimit -a
core file size          (blocks, -c) 0
data seg size           (kbytes, -d) unlimited
scheduling priority             (-e) 0
file size               (blocks, -f) unlimited
pending signals                 (-i) 257452
max locked memory       (kbytes, -l) unlimited
max memory size         (kbytes, -m) unlimited
open files                      (-n) 1024
pipe size            (512 bytes, -p) 8
POSIX message queues     (bytes, -q) 819200
real-time priority              (-r) 0
stack size              (kbytes, -s) unlimited
cpu time               (seconds, -t) unlimited
max user processes              (-u) 4096
virtual memory          (kbytes, -v) unlimited
file locks                      (-x) unlimited

@verdurin
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

verdurin commented Sep 6, 2017

@boegel

[huffmaa@ca005 ~]$ ulimit -a
core file size          (blocks, -c) 0
data seg size           (kbytes, -d) unlimited
scheduling priority             (-e) 0
file size               (blocks, -f) unlimited
pending signals                 (-i) 1027662
max locked memory       (kbytes, -l) unlimited
max memory size         (kbytes, -m) unlimited
open files                      (-n) 100000
pipe size            (512 bytes, -p) 8
POSIX message queues     (bytes, -q) 819200
real-time priority              (-r) 0
stack size              (kbytes, -s) 8192
cpu time               (seconds, -t) unlimited
max user processes              (-u) 4096
virtual memory          (kbytes, -v) unlimited
file locks                      (-x) unlimited

@boegel
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

boegel commented Sep 6, 2017

@verdurin Can you try again after running ulimit -s unlimited in that session?

@wpoely86
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

wpoely86 commented Sep 6, 2017

Test report by @wpoely86
SUCCESS
Build succeeded for 3 out of 3 (2 easyconfigs in this PR)
nic68 - Linux centos linux 7.3.1611, Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2680 v4 @ 2.40GHz, Python 2.7.5
See https://gist.github.com/f2eddc4d7612551647ff3f817ca6e16b for a full test report.

@verdurin
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

verdurin commented Sep 6, 2017

Test report by @verdurin
SUCCESS
Build succeeded for 2 out of 2 (2 easyconfigs in this PR)
ca005.camp.thecrick.org - Linux centos linux 7.3.1611, Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2640 v3 @ 2.60GHz, Python 2.7.5
See https://gist.github.com/d57e42494b94cad16cb0e6006f7c5f9d for a full test report.

verdurin
verdurin approved these changes Sep 6, 2017
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@verdurin verdurin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks fine

@verdurin
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

verdurin commented Sep 6, 2017

Going in, thanks @boegel!

@verdurin verdurin merged commit fda37c0 into easybuilders:develop Sep 6, 2017
@boegel
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

boegel commented Sep 6, 2017

@verdurin So, using ulimit -s unlimited fixed the segfault on your end?

@boegel boegel deleted the 20170905214949_new_pr_PHAST14 branch September 6, 2017 14:53
@verdurin
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

verdurin commented Sep 6, 2017

@boegel yes, hence the successful test report.

@boegel
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

boegel commented Sep 6, 2017

@verdurin OK, thanks for clarifying!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@verdurin verdurin verdurin approved these changes

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

3.4.0

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@boegel @verdurin @wpoely86