Re: [OMPI devel] [OMPI svn] svn:open-mpi r22014
On Sep 30, 2009, at 7:46 PM, George Bosilca wrote: In other words, we can safely remove the _DECLSPEC for all debugging symbols and today this will work. However, if we want to avoid having issues with them in the future (when the compiler and linked will be much much much more smarter) I think it's wiser to keep them there. Why? MPIR_Breakpoint, by not being static, *must* be visible outside of that .o file so that it can be used elsewhere in libmpi (and therefore that symbol cannot be optimized out). DECLSPEC just means that it's *also* visible *outside* of libmpi. -- Jeff Squyres jsquy...@cisco.com
Re: [OMPI devel] [OMPI svn] svn:open-mpi r22014
After spending few hours reading through some pretty good papers about shared libraries, I came to the conclusion that somehow this whole stuff is even more obfuscated that one might think. If I understand correctly, there is no need for all local symbols to be visible at all. The linker is allowed to optimize them out. However, it turned out that at least [today] in practice the local symbols are visible (with several versions of gcc, icc and vc). In other words, we can safely remove the _DECLSPEC for all debugging symbols and today this will work. However, if we want to avoid having issues with them in the future (when the compiler and linked will be much much much more smarter) I think it's wiser to keep them there. george. On Sep 30, 2009, at 06:01 , Jeff Squyres wrote: I still don't think these need to be DECLSPEC. Debuggers can find local symbols (including static symbols). Sun was having a problem with the Intel compilers because the function was being inlined -- and therefore the symbol didn't exist at all. Removing the "static" was a simple optimization to force the intel compiler to *not* inline the function. That's all. We should *not* be exposing the MPIR_Breakpoint function to user applications who -lmpi. That is what putting DECLSPEC there will do. I believe that the DECLSPEC should be removed. On Sep 30, 2009, at 12:08 AM, George Bosilca wrote: Ethan is right. The MPIR_Breakpoint function will be queried by your preferred parallel debugger, in order to set a breakpoint. Therefore, to allow the debuggers to be able to find the function we have to make sure it is externally visible, i.e. flagged with OMPI_DECLSPEC (for the one in libmpi) and with ORTE_DECLSPEC for the one in libopen-rte. And yes, we really need the *_DECLSPEC to make it visible, extern is not enough. Moreover, looking in the ompi/debugger/debugger.h file I realized that the two functions declared inside are flagged OMPI_DECLSPEC when they should not have been, as these two functions are not called from outside the libmpi. Please try r22032. george. On Sep 29, 2009, at 17:55 , Jeff Squyres wrote: > On Sep 29, 2009, at 5:30 PM, Ralph Castain wrote: > >> The issue isn't why or why not static, Jeff - the issue is that we >> get >> a compiler warning whenever we do a developer build. >> > > Right. The initial issue was the static-ness, though -- Ethan > removed the static because some compilers were effectively inlining > the function (and therefore removing the symbol from the library, > making the parallel debugger attach stuff not work) presumably > because a) the function was static, b) the function was short with > no side effects, and c) the function was only called once within > that .c file. > > Removing the "static" from the function prototype violated those > assumptions so that it could no longer be inlined (And therefore the > symbol definitely appears in the library). But then we ran across > the "must be prototyped" warning. > > That's where all this came from. :-) > > So -- I still don't think we need to DECLSPEC the prototype. :-) > >> On Sep 29, 2009, at 2:32 PM, Jeff Squyres wrote: >> >> > I don't think we need to DECLSPEC it, do we? We don't need (or >> > want) this symbol to be visible at the link level when user apps >> > link against libmpi. You might want to put in a comment about why >> > it's not static so that we don't repeat this conversation again >> next >> > year. ;-) >> > >> > I think not having it DECLSPEC'ed should still work for the >> debugger >> > (since it worked before when it was static), but if you could test >> > it to be sure, that would be great... >> > > > -- > Jeff Squyres > jsquy...@cisco.com > > ___ > devel mailing list > de...@open-mpi.org > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel ___ devel mailing list de...@open-mpi.org http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel -- Jeff Squyres jsquy...@cisco.com ___ devel mailing list de...@open-mpi.org http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
Re: [OMPI devel] [OMPI svn] svn:open-mpi r22014
On the positive side: it did solve the compiler warning issue. Not saying I disagree with these points. On Sep 30, 2009, at 4:01 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote: I still don't think these need to be DECLSPEC. Debuggers can find local symbols (including static symbols). Sun was having a problem with the Intel compilers because the function was being inlined -- and therefore the symbol didn't exist at all. Removing the "static" was a simple optimization to force the intel compiler to *not* inline the function. That's all. We should *not* be exposing the MPIR_Breakpoint function to user applications who -lmpi. That is what putting DECLSPEC there will do. I believe that the DECLSPEC should be removed. On Sep 30, 2009, at 12:08 AM, George Bosilca wrote: Ethan is right. The MPIR_Breakpoint function will be queried by your preferred parallel debugger, in order to set a breakpoint. Therefore, to allow the debuggers to be able to find the function we have to make sure it is externally visible, i.e. flagged with OMPI_DECLSPEC (for the one in libmpi) and with ORTE_DECLSPEC for the one in libopen-rte. And yes, we really need the *_DECLSPEC to make it visible, extern is not enough. Moreover, looking in the ompi/debugger/debugger.h file I realized that the two functions declared inside are flagged OMPI_DECLSPEC when they should not have been, as these two functions are not called from outside the libmpi. Please try r22032. george. On Sep 29, 2009, at 17:55 , Jeff Squyres wrote: > On Sep 29, 2009, at 5:30 PM, Ralph Castain wrote: > >> The issue isn't why or why not static, Jeff - the issue is that we >> get >> a compiler warning whenever we do a developer build. >> > > Right. The initial issue was the static-ness, though -- Ethan > removed the static because some compilers were effectively inlining > the function (and therefore removing the symbol from the library, > making the parallel debugger attach stuff not work) presumably > because a) the function was static, b) the function was short with > no side effects, and c) the function was only called once within > that .c file. > > Removing the "static" from the function prototype violated those > assumptions so that it could no longer be inlined (And therefore the > symbol definitely appears in the library). But then we ran across > the "must be prototyped" warning. > > That's where all this came from. :-) > > So -- I still don't think we need to DECLSPEC the prototype. :-) > >> On Sep 29, 2009, at 2:32 PM, Jeff Squyres wrote: >> >> > I don't think we need to DECLSPEC it, do we? We don't need (or >> > want) this symbol to be visible at the link level when user apps >> > link against libmpi. You might want to put in a comment about why >> > it's not static so that we don't repeat this conversation again >> next >> > year. ;-) >> > >> > I think not having it DECLSPEC'ed should still work for the >> debugger >> > (since it worked before when it was static), but if you could test >> > it to be sure, that would be great... >> > > > -- > Jeff Squyres > jsquy...@cisco.com > > ___ > devel mailing list > de...@open-mpi.org > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel ___ devel mailing list de...@open-mpi.org http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel -- Jeff Squyres jsquy...@cisco.com ___ devel mailing list de...@open-mpi.org http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
Re: [OMPI devel] [OMPI svn] svn:open-mpi r22014
I still don't think these need to be DECLSPEC. Debuggers can find local symbols (including static symbols). Sun was having a problem with the Intel compilers because the function was being inlined -- and therefore the symbol didn't exist at all. Removing the "static" was a simple optimization to force the intel compiler to *not* inline the function. That's all. We should *not* be exposing the MPIR_Breakpoint function to user applications who -lmpi. That is what putting DECLSPEC there will do. I believe that the DECLSPEC should be removed. On Sep 30, 2009, at 12:08 AM, George Bosilca wrote: Ethan is right. The MPIR_Breakpoint function will be queried by your preferred parallel debugger, in order to set a breakpoint. Therefore, to allow the debuggers to be able to find the function we have to make sure it is externally visible, i.e. flagged with OMPI_DECLSPEC (for the one in libmpi) and with ORTE_DECLSPEC for the one in libopen-rte. And yes, we really need the *_DECLSPEC to make it visible, extern is not enough. Moreover, looking in the ompi/debugger/debugger.h file I realized that the two functions declared inside are flagged OMPI_DECLSPEC when they should not have been, as these two functions are not called from outside the libmpi. Please try r22032. george. On Sep 29, 2009, at 17:55 , Jeff Squyres wrote: > On Sep 29, 2009, at 5:30 PM, Ralph Castain wrote: > >> The issue isn't why or why not static, Jeff - the issue is that we >> get >> a compiler warning whenever we do a developer build. >> > > Right. The initial issue was the static-ness, though -- Ethan > removed the static because some compilers were effectively inlining > the function (and therefore removing the symbol from the library, > making the parallel debugger attach stuff not work) presumably > because a) the function was static, b) the function was short with > no side effects, and c) the function was only called once within > that .c file. > > Removing the "static" from the function prototype violated those > assumptions so that it could no longer be inlined (And therefore the > symbol definitely appears in the library). But then we ran across > the "must be prototyped" warning. > > That's where all this came from. :-) > > So -- I still don't think we need to DECLSPEC the prototype. :-) > >> On Sep 29, 2009, at 2:32 PM, Jeff Squyres wrote: >> >> > I don't think we need to DECLSPEC it, do we? We don't need (or >> > want) this symbol to be visible at the link level when user apps >> > link against libmpi. You might want to put in a comment about why >> > it's not static so that we don't repeat this conversation again >> next >> > year. ;-) >> > >> > I think not having it DECLSPEC'ed should still work for the >> debugger >> > (since it worked before when it was static), but if you could test >> > it to be sure, that would be great... >> > > > -- > Jeff Squyres > jsquy...@cisco.com > > ___ > devel mailing list > de...@open-mpi.org > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel ___ devel mailing list de...@open-mpi.org http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel -- Jeff Squyres jsquy...@cisco.com
Re: [OMPI devel] [OMPI svn] svn:open-mpi r22014
Ethan is right. The MPIR_Breakpoint function will be queried by your preferred parallel debugger, in order to set a breakpoint. Therefore, to allow the debuggers to be able to find the function we have to make sure it is externally visible, i.e. flagged with OMPI_DECLSPEC (for the one in libmpi) and with ORTE_DECLSPEC for the one in libopen-rte. And yes, we really need the *_DECLSPEC to make it visible, extern is not enough. Moreover, looking in the ompi/debugger/debugger.h file I realized that the two functions declared inside are flagged OMPI_DECLSPEC when they should not have been, as these two functions are not called from outside the libmpi. Please try r22032. george. On Sep 29, 2009, at 17:55 , Jeff Squyres wrote: On Sep 29, 2009, at 5:30 PM, Ralph Castain wrote: The issue isn't why or why not static, Jeff - the issue is that we get a compiler warning whenever we do a developer build. Right. The initial issue was the static-ness, though -- Ethan removed the static because some compilers were effectively inlining the function (and therefore removing the symbol from the library, making the parallel debugger attach stuff not work) presumably because a) the function was static, b) the function was short with no side effects, and c) the function was only called once within that .c file. Removing the "static" from the function prototype violated those assumptions so that it could no longer be inlined (And therefore the symbol definitely appears in the library). But then we ran across the "must be prototyped" warning. That's where all this came from. :-) So -- I still don't think we need to DECLSPEC the prototype. :-) On Sep 29, 2009, at 2:32 PM, Jeff Squyres wrote: > I don't think we need to DECLSPEC it, do we? We don't need (or > want) this symbol to be visible at the link level when user apps > link against libmpi. You might want to put in a comment about why > it's not static so that we don't repeat this conversation again next > year. ;-) > > I think not having it DECLSPEC'ed should still work for the debugger > (since it worked before when it was static), but if you could test > it to be sure, that would be great... -- Jeff Squyres jsquy...@cisco.com ___ devel mailing list de...@open-mpi.org http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
Re: [OMPI devel] [OMPI svn] svn:open-mpi r22014
On Sep 29, 2009, at 5:30 PM, Ralph Castain wrote: The issue isn't why or why not static, Jeff - the issue is that we get a compiler warning whenever we do a developer build. Right. The initial issue was the static-ness, though -- Ethan removed the static because some compilers were effectively inlining the function (and therefore removing the symbol from the library, making the parallel debugger attach stuff not work) presumably because a) the function was static, b) the function was short with no side effects, and c) the function was only called once within that .c file. Removing the "static" from the function prototype violated those assumptions so that it could no longer be inlined (And therefore the symbol definitely appears in the library). But then we ran across the "must be prototyped" warning. That's where all this came from. :-) So -- I still don't think we need to DECLSPEC the prototype. :-) On Sep 29, 2009, at 2:32 PM, Jeff Squyres wrote: > I don't think we need to DECLSPEC it, do we? We don't need (or > want) this symbol to be visible at the link level when user apps > link against libmpi. You might want to put in a comment about why > it's not static so that we don't repeat this conversation again next > year. ;-) > > I think not having it DECLSPEC'ed should still work for the debugger > (since it worked before when it was static), but if you could test > it to be sure, that would be great... -- Jeff Squyres jsquy...@cisco.com
Re: [OMPI devel] [OMPI svn] svn:open-mpi r22014
The issue isn't why or why not static, Jeff - the issue is that we get
a compiler warning whenever we do a developer build.
On Sep 29, 2009, at 2:32 PM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
I don't think we need to DECLSPEC it, do we? We don't need (or
want) this symbol to be visible at the link level when user apps
link against libmpi. You might want to put in a comment about why
it's not static so that we don't repeat this conversation again next
year. ;-)
I think not having it DECLSPEC'ed should still work for the debugger
(since it worked before when it was static), but if you could test
it to be sure, that would be great...
On Sep 29, 2009, at 4:03 PM, Ethan Mallove wrote:
On Mon, Sep/28/2009 03:11:46PM, Ethan Mallove wrote:
> On Mon, Sep/28/2009 02:05:14PM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
> > Try a newer compiler than gcc 3.4 -- it's pretty ancient.
>
> I don't get the warning with 4.1.2 either.
To get the warning I needed to enable some developer configure
options (e.g.,
mkdir .svn && configure).
The below patch gets rid of the warning, but is it the right way?
--- ompi/debuggers/debuggers.h
+++ ompi/debuggers/debuggers.h
@@ -40,6 +40,11 @@
*/
OMPI_DECLSPEC void ompi_debugger_notify_abort(char *string);
+/**
+ * Breakpoint function for parallel debuggers.
+ */
+OMPI_DECLSPEC void *MPIR_Breakpoint(void);
+
END_C_DECLS
#endif /* OMPI_DEBUGGERS_H */
-Ethan
>
> -Ethan
>
> >
> >
> > On Sep 28, 2009, at 2:03 PM, Ethan Mallove wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Sep/25/2009 09:31:51PM, Ralph Castain wrote:
> >> > I think there is a problem with this change - here is a
warning I get
> >> when
> >> > compiling on Mac and Linux:
> >> >
> >> > ompi_debuggers.c:265: warning: no previous prototype for
> >> ‘MPIR_Breakpoint’
> >> >
> >> > Can you please take a look?
> >>
> >> Can you send me your config.log file? I can't reproduce the
warning
> >> using GCC (3.4.6) on RHEL 4.
> >>
> >> -Ethan
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Thanks
> >> > Ralph
> >> >
> >> > On Sep 25, 2009, at 1:14 PM, emall...@osl.iu.edu wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Author: emallove
> >> >> Date: 2009-09-25 15:14:19 EDT (Fri, 25 Sep 2009)
> >> >> New Revision: 22014
> >> >> URL: https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/changeset/22014
> >> >>
> >> >> Log:
> >> >> Remove `static` from `MPIR_Breakpoint` so Intel compilers
will not
> >> inline
> >> >> it
> >> >>
> >> >> Text files modified:
> >> >> trunk/ompi/debuggers/ompi_debuggers.c | 2 +-
> >> >> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >> >>
> >> >> Modified: trunk/ompi/debuggers/ompi_debuggers.c
> >> >>
> >>
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
> >> >> --- trunk/ompi/debuggers/ompi_debuggers.c(original)
> >> >> +++ trunk/ompi/debuggers/ompi_debuggers.c2009-09-25
15:14:19 EDT
> >> (Fri, 25
> >> >> Sep 2009)
> >> >> @@ -261,7 +261,7 @@
> >> >> * defined in orterun for the starter. It should never
conflict with
> >> >> * this one, but we'll make it static, just to be sure.
> >> >> */
> >> >> -static void *MPIR_Breakpoint(void)
> >> >> +void *MPIR_Breakpoint(void)
> >> >> {
> >> >> return NULL;
> >> >> }
> >> >> ___
> >> >> svn mailing list
> >> >> s...@open-mpi.org
> >> >> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/svn
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > ___
> >> > devel mailing list
> >> > de...@open-mpi.org
> >> > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jeff Squyres
> > jsquy...@cisco.com
> >
> >
> > ___
> > devel mailing list
> > de...@open-mpi.org
> > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
--
Jeff Squyres
jsquy...@cisco.com
___
devel mailing list
de...@open-mpi.org
http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
Re: [OMPI devel] [OMPI svn] svn:open-mpi r22014
I don't think we need to DECLSPEC it, do we? We don't need (or want)
this symbol to be visible at the link level when user apps link
against libmpi. You might want to put in a comment about why it's not
static so that we don't repeat this conversation again next year. ;-)
I think not having it DECLSPEC'ed should still work for the debugger
(since it worked before when it was static), but if you could test it
to be sure, that would be great...
On Sep 29, 2009, at 4:03 PM, Ethan Mallove wrote:
On Mon, Sep/28/2009 03:11:46PM, Ethan Mallove wrote:
> On Mon, Sep/28/2009 02:05:14PM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
> > Try a newer compiler than gcc 3.4 -- it's pretty ancient.
>
> I don't get the warning with 4.1.2 either.
To get the warning I needed to enable some developer configure
options (e.g.,
mkdir .svn && configure).
The below patch gets rid of the warning, but is it the right way?
--- ompi/debuggers/debuggers.h
+++ ompi/debuggers/debuggers.h
@@ -40,6 +40,11 @@
*/
OMPI_DECLSPEC void ompi_debugger_notify_abort(char *string);
+/**
+ * Breakpoint function for parallel debuggers.
+ */
+OMPI_DECLSPEC void *MPIR_Breakpoint(void);
+
END_C_DECLS
#endif /* OMPI_DEBUGGERS_H */
-Ethan
>
> -Ethan
>
> >
> >
> > On Sep 28, 2009, at 2:03 PM, Ethan Mallove wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Sep/25/2009 09:31:51PM, Ralph Castain wrote:
> >> > I think there is a problem with this change - here is a
warning I get
> >> when
> >> > compiling on Mac and Linux:
> >> >
> >> > ompi_debuggers.c:265: warning: no previous prototype for
> >> ‘MPIR_Breakpoint’
> >> >
> >> > Can you please take a look?
> >>
> >> Can you send me your config.log file? I can't reproduce the
warning
> >> using GCC (3.4.6) on RHEL 4.
> >>
> >> -Ethan
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Thanks
> >> > Ralph
> >> >
> >> > On Sep 25, 2009, at 1:14 PM, emall...@osl.iu.edu wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Author: emallove
> >> >> Date: 2009-09-25 15:14:19 EDT (Fri, 25 Sep 2009)
> >> >> New Revision: 22014
> >> >> URL: https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/changeset/22014
> >> >>
> >> >> Log:
> >> >> Remove `static` from `MPIR_Breakpoint` so Intel compilers
will not
> >> inline
> >> >> it
> >> >>
> >> >> Text files modified:
> >> >> trunk/ompi/debuggers/ompi_debuggers.c | 2 +-
> >> >> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >> >>
> >> >> Modified: trunk/ompi/debuggers/ompi_debuggers.c
> >> >>
> >>
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
==
> >> >> --- trunk/ompi/debuggers/ompi_debuggers.c(original)
> >> >> +++ trunk/ompi/debuggers/ompi_debuggers.c2009-09-25
15:14:19 EDT
> >> (Fri, 25
> >> >> Sep 2009)
> >> >> @@ -261,7 +261,7 @@
> >> >> * defined in orterun for the starter. It should never
conflict with
> >> >> * this one, but we'll make it static, just to be sure.
> >> >> */
> >> >> -static void *MPIR_Breakpoint(void)
> >> >> +void *MPIR_Breakpoint(void)
> >> >> {
> >> >> return NULL;
> >> >> }
> >> >> ___
> >> >> svn mailing list
> >> >> s...@open-mpi.org
> >> >> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/svn
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > ___
> >> > devel mailing list
> >> > de...@open-mpi.org
> >> > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jeff Squyres
> > jsquy...@cisco.com
> >
> >
> > ___
> > devel mailing list
> > de...@open-mpi.org
> > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
--
Jeff Squyres
jsquy...@cisco.com
Re: [OMPI devel] [OMPI svn] svn:open-mpi r22014
On Mon, Sep/28/2009 03:11:46PM, Ethan Mallove wrote:
> On Mon, Sep/28/2009 02:05:14PM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
> > Try a newer compiler than gcc 3.4 -- it's pretty ancient.
>
> I don't get the warning with 4.1.2 either.
To get the warning I needed to enable some developer configure options (e.g.,
mkdir .svn && configure).
The below patch gets rid of the warning, but is it the right way?
--- ompi/debuggers/debuggers.h
+++ ompi/debuggers/debuggers.h
@@ -40,6 +40,11 @@
*/
OMPI_DECLSPEC void ompi_debugger_notify_abort(char *string);
+/**
+ * Breakpoint function for parallel debuggers.
+ */
+OMPI_DECLSPEC void *MPIR_Breakpoint(void);
+
END_C_DECLS
#endif /* OMPI_DEBUGGERS_H */
-Ethan
>
> -Ethan
>
> >
> >
> > On Sep 28, 2009, at 2:03 PM, Ethan Mallove wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Sep/25/2009 09:31:51PM, Ralph Castain wrote:
> >> > I think there is a problem with this change - here is a warning I get
> >> when
> >> > compiling on Mac and Linux:
> >> >
> >> > ompi_debuggers.c:265: warning: no previous prototype for
> >> ?MPIR_Breakpoint?
> >> >
> >> > Can you please take a look?
> >>
> >> Can you send me your config.log file? I can't reproduce the warning
> >> using GCC (3.4.6) on RHEL 4.
> >>
> >> -Ethan
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Thanks
> >> > Ralph
> >> >
> >> > On Sep 25, 2009, at 1:14 PM, emall...@osl.iu.edu wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Author: emallove
> >> >> Date: 2009-09-25 15:14:19 EDT (Fri, 25 Sep 2009)
> >> >> New Revision: 22014
> >> >> URL: https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/changeset/22014
> >> >>
> >> >> Log:
> >> >> Remove `static` from `MPIR_Breakpoint` so Intel compilers will not
> >> inline
> >> >> it
> >> >>
> >> >> Text files modified:
> >> >> trunk/ompi/debuggers/ompi_debuggers.c | 2 +-
> >> >> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >> >>
> >> >> Modified: trunk/ompi/debuggers/ompi_debuggers.c
> >> >>
> >> ==
> >> >> --- trunk/ompi/debuggers/ompi_debuggers.c(original)
> >> >> +++ trunk/ompi/debuggers/ompi_debuggers.c2009-09-25 15:14:19 EDT
> >> (Fri, 25
> >> >> Sep 2009)
> >> >> @@ -261,7 +261,7 @@
> >> >> * defined in orterun for the starter. It should never conflict with
> >> >> * this one, but we'll make it static, just to be sure.
> >> >> */
> >> >> -static void *MPIR_Breakpoint(void)
> >> >> +void *MPIR_Breakpoint(void)
> >> >> {
> >> >> return NULL;
> >> >> }
> >> >> ___
> >> >> svn mailing list
> >> >> s...@open-mpi.org
> >> >> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/svn
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > ___
> >> > devel mailing list
> >> > de...@open-mpi.org
> >> > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jeff Squyres
> > jsquy...@cisco.com
> >
> >
> > ___
> > devel mailing list
> > de...@open-mpi.org
> > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
Re: [OMPI devel] [OMPI svn] svn:open-mpi r22014
On Mon, Sep/28/2009 02:05:14PM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
> Try a newer compiler than gcc 3.4 -- it's pretty ancient.
I don't get the warning with 4.1.2 either.
-Ethan
>
>
> On Sep 28, 2009, at 2:03 PM, Ethan Mallove wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Sep/25/2009 09:31:51PM, Ralph Castain wrote:
>> > I think there is a problem with this change - here is a warning I get
>> when
>> > compiling on Mac and Linux:
>> >
>> > ompi_debuggers.c:265: warning: no previous prototype for
>> ?MPIR_Breakpoint?
>> >
>> > Can you please take a look?
>>
>> Can you send me your config.log file? I can't reproduce the warning
>> using GCC (3.4.6) on RHEL 4.
>>
>> -Ethan
>>
>> >
>> > Thanks
>> > Ralph
>> >
>> > On Sep 25, 2009, at 1:14 PM, emall...@osl.iu.edu wrote:
>> >
>> >> Author: emallove
>> >> Date: 2009-09-25 15:14:19 EDT (Fri, 25 Sep 2009)
>> >> New Revision: 22014
>> >> URL: https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/changeset/22014
>> >>
>> >> Log:
>> >> Remove `static` from `MPIR_Breakpoint` so Intel compilers will not
>> inline
>> >> it
>> >>
>> >> Text files modified:
>> >> trunk/ompi/debuggers/ompi_debuggers.c | 2 +-
>> >> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>> >>
>> >> Modified: trunk/ompi/debuggers/ompi_debuggers.c
>> >>
>> ==
>> >> --- trunk/ompi/debuggers/ompi_debuggers.c(original)
>> >> +++ trunk/ompi/debuggers/ompi_debuggers.c2009-09-25 15:14:19 EDT
>> (Fri, 25
>> >> Sep 2009)
>> >> @@ -261,7 +261,7 @@
>> >> * defined in orterun for the starter. It should never conflict with
>> >> * this one, but we'll make it static, just to be sure.
>> >> */
>> >> -static void *MPIR_Breakpoint(void)
>> >> +void *MPIR_Breakpoint(void)
>> >> {
>> >> return NULL;
>> >> }
>> >> ___
>> >> svn mailing list
>> >> s...@open-mpi.org
>> >> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/svn
>> >
>> >
>> > ___
>> > devel mailing list
>> > de...@open-mpi.org
>> > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Jeff Squyres
> jsquy...@cisco.com
>
>
> ___
> devel mailing list
> de...@open-mpi.org
> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
Re: [OMPI devel] [OMPI svn] svn:open-mpi r22014
Try a newer compiler than gcc 3.4 -- it's pretty ancient.
On Sep 28, 2009, at 2:03 PM, Ethan Mallove wrote:
On Fri, Sep/25/2009 09:31:51PM, Ralph Castain wrote:
> I think there is a problem with this change - here is a warning I
get when
> compiling on Mac and Linux:
>
> ompi_debuggers.c:265: warning: no previous prototype for
‘MPIR_Breakpoint’
>
> Can you please take a look?
Can you send me your config.log file? I can't reproduce the warning
using GCC (3.4.6) on RHEL 4.
-Ethan
>
> Thanks
> Ralph
>
> On Sep 25, 2009, at 1:14 PM, emall...@osl.iu.edu wrote:
>
>> Author: emallove
>> Date: 2009-09-25 15:14:19 EDT (Fri, 25 Sep 2009)
>> New Revision: 22014
>> URL: https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/changeset/22014
>>
>> Log:
>> Remove `static` from `MPIR_Breakpoint` so Intel compilers will
not inline
>> it
>>
>> Text files modified:
>> trunk/ompi/debuggers/ompi_debuggers.c | 2 +-
>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>
>> Modified: trunk/ompi/debuggers/ompi_debuggers.c
>>
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
==
>> --- trunk/ompi/debuggers/ompi_debuggers.c(original)
>> +++ trunk/ompi/debuggers/ompi_debuggers.c2009-09-25 15:14:19
EDT (Fri, 25
>> Sep 2009)
>> @@ -261,7 +261,7 @@
>> * defined in orterun for the starter. It should never conflict
with
>> * this one, but we'll make it static, just to be sure.
>> */
>> -static void *MPIR_Breakpoint(void)
>> +void *MPIR_Breakpoint(void)
>> {
>> return NULL;
>> }
>> ___
>> svn mailing list
>> s...@open-mpi.org
>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/svn
>
>
> ___
> devel mailing list
> de...@open-mpi.org
> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
--
Jeff Squyres
jsquy...@cisco.com
Re: [OMPI devel] [OMPI svn] svn:open-mpi r22014
On Fri, Sep/25/2009 09:31:51PM, Ralph Castain wrote:
> I think there is a problem with this change - here is a warning I get when
> compiling on Mac and Linux:
>
> ompi_debuggers.c:265: warning: no previous prototype for ?MPIR_Breakpoint?
>
> Can you please take a look?
Can you send me your config.log file? I can't reproduce the warning
using GCC (3.4.6) on RHEL 4.
-Ethan
>
> Thanks
> Ralph
>
> On Sep 25, 2009, at 1:14 PM, emall...@osl.iu.edu wrote:
>
>> Author: emallove
>> Date: 2009-09-25 15:14:19 EDT (Fri, 25 Sep 2009)
>> New Revision: 22014
>> URL: https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/changeset/22014
>>
>> Log:
>> Remove `static` from `MPIR_Breakpoint` so Intel compilers will not inline
>> it
>>
>> Text files modified:
>> trunk/ompi/debuggers/ompi_debuggers.c | 2 +-
>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>
>> Modified: trunk/ompi/debuggers/ompi_debuggers.c
>> ==
>> --- trunk/ompi/debuggers/ompi_debuggers.c(original)
>> +++ trunk/ompi/debuggers/ompi_debuggers.c2009-09-25 15:14:19 EDT (Fri,
>> 25
>> Sep 2009)
>> @@ -261,7 +261,7 @@
>> * defined in orterun for the starter. It should never conflict with
>> * this one, but we'll make it static, just to be sure.
>> */
>> -static void *MPIR_Breakpoint(void)
>> +void *MPIR_Breakpoint(void)
>> {
>> return NULL;
>> }
>> ___
>> svn mailing list
>> s...@open-mpi.org
>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/svn
>
>
> ___
> devel mailing list
> de...@open-mpi.org
> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
Re: [OMPI devel] [OMPI svn] svn:open-mpi r22014
I think there is a problem with this change - here is a warning I get
when compiling on Mac and Linux:
ompi_debuggers.c:265: warning: no previous prototype for
‘MPIR_Breakpoint’
Can you please take a look?
Thanks
Ralph
On Sep 25, 2009, at 1:14 PM, emall...@osl.iu.edu wrote:
Author: emallove
Date: 2009-09-25 15:14:19 EDT (Fri, 25 Sep 2009)
New Revision: 22014
URL: https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/changeset/22014
Log:
Remove `static` from `MPIR_Breakpoint` so Intel compilers will not
inline it
Text files modified:
trunk/ompi/debuggers/ompi_debuggers.c | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
Modified: trunk/ompi/debuggers/ompi_debuggers.c
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
==
--- trunk/ompi/debuggers/ompi_debuggers.c (original)
+++ trunk/ompi/debuggers/ompi_debuggers.c 2009-09-25 15:14:19 EDT
(Fri, 25 Sep 2009)
@@ -261,7 +261,7 @@
* defined in orterun for the starter. It should never conflict with
* this one, but we'll make it static, just to be sure.
*/
-static void *MPIR_Breakpoint(void)
+void *MPIR_Breakpoint(void)
{
return NULL;
}
___
svn mailing list
s...@open-mpi.org
http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/svn
