intel v10.1 compilers
rad.... at arl.army.mil
Tue Apr 29 12:52:04 UTC 2008
I am happy with intel 9.x version of intel compilers. Except when I
have to use libint I use the version of cp2k compiled with version
10.0 compiler. That too I managed to compile only on one architecture
(SGI ALTIX). If others have done successful libint compile with
version 9.x intel compiler I would like to know. (ISO binding is where
I have problem with lower version of intel compilers)
On Apr 28, 11:39 am, ilya <ily... at gmail.com> wrote:
> The full version was 9.1.052 and as I know it's one of the latest
> (maybe THE latest) versions.
> The problem was only with parallel version of CP2K.
> I think the problem was with the combination of many factors
> (compiler, MKL, fftlib, MPI, etc).
> On Apr 25, 10:45 pm, Axel <akoh... at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Apr 25, 2:55 am, ilya <ily... at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi !!!
> > > I remember that when I tried to compile the whole cp2k with intel 9.1
> > > on opteron I've got a lot of strange problems with seg faults etc.
> > v9.1 != v9.1
> > the magic is in the patchlevels. if the compiler is around
> > long enough and has been patched often enough, it will be
> > working as good as possible without major rewrites.
> > it is just annoying to have to go through the same circle
> > over and over again.
> > axel.
> > > Upgrading to 10.1 allowed me to successfully compile the thing.
> > > In both cases of course I turned off Intel specific optimizations (no -
> > > xSomething key; -O2).
> > > It's interesting whether intel provides some sort of 'official'
> > > support for nonintel x86 and x86_64 cpus
> > > (and for intel cpus too :-) ).
> > > I also know that they replaced vectorization module in intel 10.1
> > > (compared to 9.1). And in some cases this new vectorizer generates
> > > code that runs several times slower (i've made a simple synthetic test
> > > -- mandelbrot fractal generator). Some people on their developer forum
> > > also reported such performance problems on new compilers.
> > > Of course for real-problem code I think there is no such degradation.
> > > But anyway...
> > > So it's interesting what are they doing there in intel???
> > > PS To tell the truth, their performance suites are rather handy and
> > > FREE for linux. So it's very unpleasant to see such problems.
> > > Unfortunately...
> > > On Apr 24, 8:58 pm, Axel <akoh... at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > hi everybody,
> > > > it may perhaps of interest to several people here, that after
> > > > extensive
> > > > testing, i have to come to the conclusion that the current intel
> > > > v10.1
> > > > compilers invariably miscompile some modules of cp2k on all platforms
> > > > (but different ones on each) and regardless of the optimization level
> > > > and
> > > > patchlevel of the compiler. most problems show only up when running
> > > > in parallel.
> > > > in all the problematic cases, using a g95 or intel v9.1
> > > > compiled executable (with -O2 optimization only) was
> > > > fixing the problems.
> > > > cheers,
> > > > axel.- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
More information about the CP2K-user