Gilles,
First, please note that prior tests of 1.8.3 ran with no problems on these
hosts.
So, I *think* this problem is a regression.
However, I am not 100% certain that this *exact* configuration was tested.
So, I am RE-running a test of 1.8.3 now to be absolutely sure if this is a
regression.
I will report the outcome when I can.
I have limited time to run the tests you are asking for. I will do my
best, but am concerned that I won't be responsive enough and may hold up
the release. I fully understand why you ask multiple questions in one
email to keep things moving.
I am running mpirun on pcp-j-20 and "getent hosts pcp-j-20" run there yields
$ getent hosts pcp-j-20
127.0.0.1 pcp-j-20 pcp-j-20.local localhost loghost
172.16.0.120 pcp-j-20 pcp-j-20.local localhost loghost
In case it matters: there is an entry for 172.18.0.0.120 in /etc/hosts as
pcp-j-20-ib.
I will run a test tonight to determine if the same issue is present without
"-m64".
I will report the outcome when I can.
Yes, I can ping and ssh to "pcp-j-{19,20}" and "172.{16,18}.0.{119,120}".
I see the following if run on either pcp-j-19 or pcp-j-20:
$ for x in {pcp-j-,172.{16,18}.0.1}{19,20}; do ssh $x echo OK connecting to
$x; done
OK connecting to pcp-j-19
OK connecting to pcp-j-20
OK connecting to 172.16.0.119
OK connecting to 172.16.0.120
OK connecting to 172.18.0.119
OK connecting to 172.18.0.120
I will report on the 1.8.3 and the non-m64 runs when they are done.
Meanwhile, if you have other things you want run let me know.
-Paul
On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Gilles Gouaillardet <
gilles.gouaillar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks Paul,
>
> Are you invoking mpirun on pcp-j-20 ?
> If yes, what does
> getent hosts pcp-j-20
> says ?
>
> BTW, did you try without -m64 ?
>
> Does the following work
> ping/ssh 172.18.0.120
>
> Honestly, this output makes very little sense to me, so i am asking way
> too much info hoping i can reproduce this issue or get a hint on what can
> possibly goes wrong.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Gilles
>
> Paul Hargrove <phhargr...@lbl.gov> wrote:
> Gilles,
>
> I am running mpirun on a host that ALSO will run one of the application
> processes.
> Requested ifconfig and netstat outputs appear below.
>
> -Paul
>
> [phargrov@pcp-j-20 ~]$ ifconfig -a
> lo0: flags=2001000849<UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST,IPv4,VIRTUAL> mtu 8232
> index 1
> inet 127.0.0.1 netmask ff000000
> bge0: flags=1004843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST,DHCP,IPv4> mtu 1500
> index 2
> inet 172.16.0.120 netmask ffff0000 broadcast 172.16.255.255
> pFFFF.ibp0: flags=1001000843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST,IPv4,FIXEDMTU>
> mtu 2044 index 3
> inet 172.18.0.120 netmask ffff0000 broadcast 172.18.255.255
> lo0: flags=2002000849<UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST,IPv6,VIRTUAL> mtu 8252
> index 1
> inet6 ::1/128
> bge0: flags=20002004841<UP,RUNNING,MULTICAST,DHCP,IPv6> mtu 1500 index 2
> inet6 fe80::250:45ff:fe5c:2b0/10
> [phargrov@pcp-j-20 ~]$ netstat -nr
>
> Routing Table: IPv4
> Destination Gateway Flags Ref Use Interface
> -------------------- -------------------- ----- ----- ---------- ---------
> default 172.16.254.1 UG 2 158463 bge0
> 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 UH 5 398913 lo0
> 172.16.0.0 172.16.0.120 U 4 135241319 bge0
> 172.18.0.0 172.18.0.120 U 3 26
> pFFFF.ibp0
>
> Routing Table: IPv6
> Destination/Mask Gateway Flags Ref Use
> If
> --------------------------- --------------------------- ----- --- -------
> -----
> ::1 ::1 UH 2 0
> lo0
> fe80::/10 fe80::250:45ff:fe5c:2b0 U 2 0
> bge0
>
> On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 2:55 AM, Gilles Gouaillardet <
> gilles.gouaillar...@iferc.org> wrote:
>>
>> Paul,
>>
>> could you please send the output of
>> ifconfig -a
>> netstat -nr
>>
>> on the three hosts you are using
>> (i assume you are still invoking mpirun from one node, and tasks are
>> running on two other nodes)
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Gilles
>>
>>
>> On 2014/12/16 16:00, Paul Hargrove wrote:
>>
>> Gilles,
>>
>> I looked again carefully and I am *NOT* finding -D_REENTRANT passed to most
>> compilations.
>> It appears to be used for building libevent and vt, but nothing else.
>> The output from configure contains
>>
>> checking if more special flags are required for pthreads... -D_REENTRANT
>>
>> only in the libevent and vt sub-configure portions.
>>
>> When configured for gcc on Solaris-11 I see the following in configure
>>
>> checking for C optimization flags... -m64 -D_REENTRANT -g
>> -finline-functions -fno-strict-aliasing
>>
>> but with CC=cc the equivalent line is
>>
>> checking for C optimization flags... -m64 -g
>>
>> In both cases the "-m64" is from the CFLAGS I have passed to configure.
>>
>> However, when I use CFLAGS="-m64 -D_REENTRANT" the problem DOES NOT go away.
>> I see
>>
>> [pcp-j-20:24740] mca_oob_tcp_accept: accept() failed: Error 0 (11).
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> A process or daemon was unable to complete a TCP connection
>> to another process:
>> Local host: pcp-j-20
>> Remote host: 172.18.0.120
>> This is usually caused by a firewall on the remote host. Please
>> check that any firewall (e.g., iptables) has been disabled and
>> try again.
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> which is at least appears to have a non-zero errno.
>> A quick grep through /usr/include/sys/errno shows 11 is EAGAIN.
>>
>> With the oob.patch you provided the failed accept goes away, BUT the
>> connection still fails:
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> A process or daemon was unable to complete a TCP connection
>> to another process:
>> Local host: pcp-j-20
>> Remote host: 172.18.0.120
>> This is usually caused by a firewall on the remote host. Please
>> check that any firewall (e.g., iptables) has been disabled and
>> try again.
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> Use of "-mca oob_tcp_if_include bge0" to use a single interface did not fix
>> this.
>>
>>
>> -Paul
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 7:18 PM, Paul Hargrove <phhargr...@lbl.gov>
>> <phhargr...@lbl.gov> wrote:
>>
>> Gilles,
>>
>> I am NOT seeing the problem with gcc.
>> It is only occurring with the Studio compilers.
>>
>> As I've already reported, I have tried adding either "-mt" or "-mt=yes" to
>> both LDFLAGS and --with-wrapper-ldflags.
>>
>> The "cc" manpage (on the Solaris-10 system I can get to right now) says:
>>
>> -mt Compile and link for multithreaded code.
>>
>> This option passes -D_REENTRANT to the preprocessor and
>> passes -lthread in the correct order to ld.
>>
>> The -mt option is required if the application or
>> libraries are multithreaded.
>>
>> To ensure proper library linking order, you must use
>> this option, rather than -lthread, to link with lib-
>> thread.
>>
>> If you are using POSIX threads, you must link with the
>> options -mt -lpthread. The -mt option is necessary
>> because libC and libCrun need libthread for a mul-
>> tithreaded application.
>>
>> If you compile and link in separate steps and you com-
>> pile with -mt, you might get unexpected results. If you
>> compile one translation unit with -mt, compile all
>> units of the program with -mt.
>>
>> I cannot connect to my Solaris-11 system right now, but I recall the text
>> to be quite similar.
>>
>> -Paul
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 7:12 PM, Gilles Gouaillardet
>> <gilles.gouaillar...@iferc.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Paul,
>>
>> did you manually set -mt ?
>>
>> if i remember correctly, solaris 11 (at least with gcc compilers) do not
>> need any flags
>> (except the -D_REENTRANT that is added automatically)
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Gilles
>>
>>
>> On 2014/12/16 12:10, Paul Hargrove wrote:
>>
>> Gilles,
>>
>> I will try the patch when I can.
>> However, our network is undergoing network maintenance right now, leaving
>> me unable to reach the necessary hosts.
>>
>> As for -D_REENTRANT, I had already reported having verified in the "make"
>> output that it had been added automatically.
>>
>> Additionally, the docs say that "-mt" *also* passes -D_REENTRANT to the
>> preprocessor.
>>
>> -Paul
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 6:07 PM, Gilles Gouaillardet
>> <gilles.gouaillar...@iferc.org> <gilles.gouaillar...@iferc.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Paul,
>>
>> could you please make sure configure added "-D_REENTRANT" to the CFLAGS ?
>> /* otherwise, errno is a global variable instead of a per thread variable,
>> which can
>> explains some weird behaviour. note this should have been already fixed */
>>
>> assuming -D_REENTRANT is set, could you please give the attached patch a
>> try ?
>>
>> i suspect the CLOSE_THE_SOCKET macro resets errno, and hence the confusing
>> error message
>> e.g. failed: Error 0 (0)
>>
>> FWIW, master is also affected.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Gilles
>>
>>
>> On 2014/12/16 10:47, Paul Hargrove wrote:
>>
>> I have tried with a oob_tcp_if_include setting so that there is now only 1
>> interface.
>> Even with just one interface and -mt=yes in both LDFLAGS and
>> wrapper-ldflags I *still* getting messages like
>>
>> [pcp-j-20:11470] mca_oob_tcp_accept: accept() failed: Error 0 (0).
>> ------------------------------
>> ------------------------------
>> A process or daemon was unable to complete a TCP connection
>> to another process:
>> Local host: pcp-j-20
>> Remote host: 172.16.0.120
>> This is usually caused by a firewall on the remote host. Please
>> check that any firewall (e.g., iptables) has been disabled and
>> try again.
>> ------------------------------
>> ------------------------------
>>
>>
>> I am getting less certain that my speculation about thread-safe libs is
>> correct.
>>
>> -Paul
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Paul Hargrove <phhargr...@lbl.gov>
>> <phhargr...@lbl.gov> <phhargr...@lbl.gov> <phhargr...@lbl.gov>
>> <phhargr...@lbl.gov> <phhargr...@lbl.gov> <phhargr...@lbl.gov>
>> <phhargr...@lbl.gov> wrote:
>>
>> A little more reading finds that...
>>
>> Docs says that one needs "-mt" without the "=yes".
>> That will work for both old and new compilers, where "-mt=yes" chokes
>> older ones.
>>
>> Also, man pages say "-mt" must come before "-lpthread" in the link command.
>>
>> -Paul
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Paul Hargrove <phhargr...@lbl.gov>
>> <phhargr...@lbl.gov> <phhargr...@lbl.gov> <phhargr...@lbl.gov>
>> <phhargr...@lbl.gov> <phhargr...@lbl.gov> <phhargr...@lbl.gov>
>> <phhargr...@lbl.gov>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 5:35 AM, Ralph Castain <r...@open-mpi.org>
>> <r...@open-mpi.org> <r...@open-mpi.org> <r...@open-mpi.org>
>> <r...@open-mpi.org> <r...@open-mpi.org> <r...@open-mpi.org>
>> <r...@open-mpi.org> wrote:
>>
>> 7. Linkage issue on Solaris-11 reported by Paul Hargrove. Missing the
>> multi-threaded C libraries, apparently need "-mt=yes" in both compile and
>> link. Need someone to investigate.
>>
>>
>> The lack of multi-thread libraries is my SPECULATION.
>>
>> The fact that configuring with LDFLAGS=-mt=yes did not help may or may
>> not prove anything.
>> I didn't see them in "mpicc -show" and so maybe they needed to be in
>> wrapper-ldflags instead.
>> My time this week is quite limited, but I can "fire an forget" tests of
>> any tarballs you provide.
>>
>> -Paul
>>
>> --
>> Paul H. Hargrove phhargr...@lbl.gov
>>
>>
>> Computer Languages & Systems Software (CLaSS) Group
>> Computer Science Department Tel: +1-510-495-2352
>> Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Fax: +1-510-486-6900
>>
>>
>> --
>> Paul H. Hargrove phhargr...@lbl.gov
>> Computer Languages & Systems Software (CLaSS) Group
>> Computer Science Department Tel: +1-510-495-2352
>> Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Fax: +1-510-486-6900
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> devel mailing listde...@open-mpi.org
>> Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
>> Link to this post:
>> http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2014/12/16607.php
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> devel mailing listde...@open-mpi.org
>> Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
>>
>> Link to this
>> post:http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2014/12/16608.php
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> devel mailing listde...@open-mpi.org
>> Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
>>
>> Link to this post:
>> http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2014/12/16610.php
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> devel mailing listde...@open-mpi.org
>> Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
>> Link to this
>> post:http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2014/12/16611.php
>>
>> --
>> Paul H. Hargrove phhargr...@lbl.gov
>> Computer Languages & Systems Software (CLaSS) Group
>> Computer Science Department Tel: +1-510-495-2352
>> Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Fax: +1-510-486-6900
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> devel mailing listde...@open-mpi.org
>> Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
>> Link to this post:
>> http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2014/12/16613.php
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> devel mailing list
>> de...@open-mpi.org
>> Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
>> Link to this post:
>> http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2014/12/16615.php
>>
>
>
> --
> Paul H. Hargrove phhargr...@lbl.gov
> Computer Languages & Systems Software (CLaSS) Group
> Computer Science Department Tel: +1-510-495-2352
> Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Fax: +1-510-486-6900
>
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> de...@open-mpi.org
> Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
> Link to this post:
> http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2014/12/16619.php
>
--
Paul H. Hargrove phhargr...@lbl.gov
Computer Languages & Systems Software (CLaSS) Group
Computer Science Department Tel: +1-510-495-2352
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Fax: +1-510-486-6900
