I've got a PMR open about this ... Will email you the number directly. Looking at the man page for ld.gold, it looks to set '--posix-fallocate' by default. In fact, testing with '-Xlinker -no-posix-fallocate' does indeed make the code compile.
Simon From: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Wednesday, 23 August 2017 at 13:36 To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, Simon Thompson <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] AFM weirdness I believe this error is result of preallocation failure, but traces are needed to confirm this. AFM caching modes does not support preallocation of blocks (ex. using fallocate()). This feature is supported only in AFM DR. ~Venkat ([email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>) From: "Simon Thompson (IT Research Support)" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> To: gpfsug main discussion list <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: 08/23/2017 03:48 PM Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] AFM weirdness Sent by: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> ________________________________ OK so I checked and if I run directly on the "AFM" FS in a different "non AFM" directory, it works fine, so its something AFM related ... Simon On 23/08/2017, 11:11, "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> on behalf of Simon Thompson (IT Research Support)" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> on behalf of [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >We're using an AFM cache from our HPC nodes to access data in another GPFS >cluster, mostly this seems to be working fine, but we've just come across >an interesting problem with a user using gfortran from the GCC 5.2.0 >toolset. > >When linking their code, they get a "no space left on device" error back >from the linker. If we do this on a node that mounts the file-system >directly (I.e. Not via AFM cache), then it works fine. > >We tried with GCC 4.5 based tools and it works OK, but the difference >there is that 4.x uses ld and 5x uses ld.gold. > >If we strike the ld.gold when using AFM, we see: > >stat("program", {st_mode=S_IFREG|0775, st_size=248480, ...}) = 0 >unlink("program") = 0 >open("program", O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_TRUNC|O_CLOEXEC, 0777) = 30 >fstat(30, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0775, st_size=0, ...}) = 0 >fallocate(30, 0, 0, 248480) = -1 ENOSPC (No space left on >device) > > > >Vs when running directly on the file-system: >stat("program", {st_mode=S_IFREG|0775, st_size=248480, ...}) = 0 >unlink("program") = 0 >open("program", O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_TRUNC|O_CLOEXEC, 0777) = 30 >fstat(30, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0775, st_size=0, ...}) = 0 >fallocate(30, 0, 0, 248480) = 0 > > > >Anyone seen anything like this before? > >... Actually I'm about to go off and see if its a function of AFM, or >maybe something to do with the FS in use (I.e. Make a local directory on >the filesystem on the "AFM" FS and see if that works ...) > >Thanks > >Simon > >_______________________________________________ >gpfsug-discuss mailing list >gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org >https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gpfsug.org_mailman_listinfo_gpfsug-2Ddiscuss&d=DwICAg&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=92LOlNh2yLzrrGTDA7HnfF8LFr55zGxghLZtvZcZD7A&m=UqTzoU-bx454OgyeB4f0Nrruvs7yYAxFutzIe2eKmnc&s=8E5opHyyAwomLS8kdxpvKCvf6sdKBLlfZvx6wDdaZy4&e= _______________________________________________ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gpfsug.org_mailman_listinfo_gpfsug-2Ddiscuss&d=DwICAg&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=92LOlNh2yLzrrGTDA7HnfF8LFr55zGxghLZtvZcZD7A&m=UqTzoU-bx454OgyeB4f0Nrruvs7yYAxFutzIe2eKmnc&s=8E5opHyyAwomLS8kdxpvKCvf6sdKBLlfZvx6wDdaZy4&e=
_______________________________________________ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
