Help with Intel compilation

[Alfio Lazzaro]

Oh yes, the situation is definitely better... 
Concerning the wrong results, I noticed that you are using 12 ranks in your 
regtest (is this correct?). Some of the tests have references that 
depend on the number of ranks (usually we set it to 2 or 4 ranks), 
therefore I assume that if your run with 2 ranks the problem will go away. 
Could you test it? Then, there are only *primary* 4 tests that are failing. 
At this point, I don't know where the problem is, but likely it is an 
effect of the 12 ranks...

Alfio


Il giorno venerdì 2 febbraio 2018 01:39:13 UTC+1, Barry Moore ha scritto:
>
> Alfio,
>
> I borrowed a Linux-x86-64-intel-mic.psmp which I know to be working 
> somewhere else (we are regtesting that version now) for cp2k 4.1. It is 
> definitely a lot better than before, but I still get some failures. I 
> attach the arch file and error_summary. Any comments?
>
> - Barry
>
> On Thursday, February 1, 2018 at 4:21:18 PM UTC-5, Barry Moore wrote:
>>
>> For reference, this didn't work. Same failures.
>>
>> On Tuesday, January 30, 2018 at 12:54:29 PM UTC-5, Barry Moore wrote:
>>>
>>> Alfio,
>>>
>>> Thanks a lot for that tip, I am working on compiling/regtesting now. 
>>> Fingers crossed.
>>>
>>> I do think cleaning up the arch directory would be really helpful for 
>>> administrators. 
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Barry
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, January 30, 2018 at 4:23:34 AM UTC-5, Alfio Lazzaro wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hello Barry,
>>>> The arch you are using (Linux-x86-64-intel-mic.psmp) is pretty old and 
>>>> messy (it refers to Intel KNC with offload mode). Sorry about that, I will 
>>>> update it for the next release.
>>>> Now, we do test CP2K with Intel compiler in our dashboard: 
>>>> https://dashboard.cp2k.org/
>>>> For instance, this test
>>>>
>>>> http://cp2k-www.epcc.ed.ac.uk/phi/popt/regtest-0
>>>>
>>>> has an arch file (see on top of the log). We test ICC version 17.0.4, 
>>>> which is pretty outdated now. 
>>>> It can be that there are some bugs in the newer ICC version (we have 
>>>> seen this in the past). I would suggest you use the arch file from the 
>>>> dashboard, set -O0 mode, and try to run the regtests. Intel people told us 
>>>> to use "-fp-model precise" can be useful as well... 
>>>>
>>>> Alfio
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Il giorno lunedì 29 gennaio 2018 16:15:24 UTC+1, Barry Moore ha scritto:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hello All,
>>>>>
>>>>> I will preface this by stating I am not a CP2K user. I support CP2K 
>>>>> users.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have compiled CP2K a few times using the toolchain style with all of 
>>>>> the
>>>>> plugins (4.1, 5.1 w/ Intel MKL 2017.1.132). I have found that if I use 
>>>>> Intel
>>>>> MKL 2017.3.196 neither version 4.1 nor 5.1 passes regression tests. 
>>>>> Anyway, recently a
>>>>> student showed me some scaling plots and they are atrocious. I need to
>>>>> reconcile this because the major users at our center are all using 
>>>>> CP2K and I
>>>>> am basically throwing away computer time on one of our busiest 
>>>>> resources.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, I built an arch file starting from Linux-x86-64-intel-mic.psmp 
>>>>> (`h2p.psmp`
>>>>> attached). I ignored ACC & MIC stuff and tried to simplify the MKL 
>>>>> section.
>>>>>  I installed libxc and libint by modifying the toolchain scripts
>>>>> (scripts attached). Finally, I attach the regression log
>>>>> (`cp2k-regtest-5.1.log`). Any help is appreciated.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Barry
>>>>>
>>>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.cp2k.org/archives/cp2k-user/attachments/20180202/ce3af11b/attachment.htm>