On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 7:13 PM, Barry Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Jan 19, 2014, at 6:23 PM, Satish Balay <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Sun, 19 Jan 2014, Jed Brown wrote: > > > >> Barry Smith <[email protected]> writes: > >> > >>> Nope because in my previous assignment I asked Satish to check for > >>> -O stuff in compiler wrappers as well as CFLAGS. > >> > >> So if a user builds with MPICH, they'll get different optimization > >> options than building with Open MPI, simply because MPICH includes -O2 > >> in the wrapper? > >> > >>>> and some compilers have funny names for > >>>> optimization flags. > >>> > >>> This is a small possibility because normally there is a -Od as well > >>> as the funny named other stuff. If we come upon another funny name > >>> that replaces -Od we can incorporate that as well. > >> > >> I'm just not wild about being in the business of classifying which > >> options are related to optimization. > > > > Perhaps swapping the order from '$CFLAGS $COPTFLAGS' to '$COPTFLAGS > > $CFLAGS' will suffice. > > No, this needs to be done right. Turn off PETSc setting optimization > flags if mpicc or CFLAGS attempts to set them. > I agree with Jed that this is problematic. We will end up fixing false positives with this, only it will not be a user error anymore (using CFLAGS instead of COPTFLAGS as indicated in the docs), it will be our error, and it will waste our time looking for it. Matt > Barry > > > > > Satish > > -- What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their experiments lead. -- Norbert Wiener
