Well, I'm stumped then...my top-level program is the only one that uses MPI interfaces. I USE other f90 module files, but none of them are dependent on MPI functions. For example here's the first few lines of code where things act up:
PROGRAM main INCLUDE 'mpif.h' (this line used to be "USE mpi"...this is correct replacement, right?) USE local_module IMPLICIT NONE ... STOP END PROGRAM main with local_module.f90: MODULE local_module CONTAINS SUBROUTINE local_subroutine IMPLICIT NONE ... RETURN END SUBROUTINE local_subroutine END MODULE local_module and mpif90 gives me grief about local_module being out of scope within main. To the best of my knowledge, I have never used fixed-form or had free-vs-fixed form compiler issues with ifort. Thanks! On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 7:56 PM, Gus Correa <g...@ldeo.columbia.edu> wrote: > Hi Brian and list > > On my code I have > > include 'mpif.h' > > with single quotes around the file name. > I use single quotes, but double quotes are also possible according to the > F90 standard. > If you start at column 7 and end at column 72, > you avoid any problems with free vs. fixed Fortran form (which may happen if > one decides > to mess the compiler options on Makefiles, for instance). > This is PDP, paranoid defensive programming. > I type the Fortran commands in lowercase (include) but this may not really > make any difference > (although there are compiler options to transliterate upper to lower, be/not > be case sensitive, etc) > > However, since you asked, I changed the "include 'mpif.h'" location to > column 1, column 6, > etc, and I could compile the code with OpenMPI mpif90 without any problems. > Hence, I presume mpif90 uses the free form as default. > So, I wonder if you still have some residual mix of gfortran and ifort > there, > or if there is some funny configuration on your ifort.cfg file choosing the > fixed form as a default. > > In any case, going out of scope probably has nothing to do with fixed vs > free form. > I only have one "use mpi" statement, no other modules "used" in the little > hello_f90. > It may well be that if you try other "use" statements, particularly if the > respective modules > involve other MPI modules or MPI function interfaces, things may break and > be out of scope. > I presume you are not talking of hello_f90 anymore, but of a larger code. > The large code examples I have here use other F90 modules (not mpi.mod), > but they don't rely on MPI interfaces. > > Glad to know that the main problem is gone (I read the more recent > messages). > I was reluctant to tell you to do a "make distclean", and start fresh, > configure again, make again, > because you said you had built the OpenMPI library more than once. > Now I think that was exactly what I should have told you to do. > Everybody builds these things many times to get them right. > Then a few more times to make it efficient, to optimize, etc. > Can you imagine how many times Rutherford set up that gold foil experiment > until he got it right? :) > After it is done, the past errors become trivial, and all the rest is > reduced just to stamp collecting. :) > Configure is always complex, and dumping its output to a log file is > worth the effort, to check out for sticky problems like this, which often > happen. > (Likewise for make and make install.) > > I hope this helps, > Gus Correa > > -- > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Gustavo J. Ponce Correa, PhD - Email: g...@ldeo.columbia.edu > Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory - Columbia University > P.O. Box 1000 [61 Route 9W] - Palisades, NY, 10964-8000 - USA > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Brian Harker wrote: > >> Hi Gus- >> >> Thanks for the idea. One question: how do you position INCLUDE >> statements in a fortran program, because if I just straight substitute >> ' INCLUDE "mpif.h" ' for ' USE mpi ', I get a lot of crap telling me >> my other USE statements are not positioned correctly within the scope >> and nothing compiles. I have tried various positions, but I seem to >> be suffering from a lot of BS. Am I overlooking something very >> obvious? >> >> On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 5:42 PM, Gus Correa <g...@ldeo.columbia.edu> wrote: >> >>> >>> Hi Brian and list >>> >>> I seldom used the "use mpi" syntax before. >>> I have a lot of code here written in Fortran 90, >>> but and mpif.h is included instead "use mpi". >>> The MPI function calls are the same in Fortran 77 and Fortran 90 syntax, >>> hence there is just one line of code to change, if one wants to go fully >>> F90. >>> All works well, though. >>> This style is a legacy from the times when the Fortran90 interface of MPI >>> was not fully developed, >>> and the mpi.mod was broken most of the time. >>> That is no longer the case, though. >>> >>> This mixed mode may be one way around your problem, although not ideal. >>> The main drawback of using the "include mpif.h" syntax >>> is that there is no parameter checking of the MPI function calls, >>> whereas the "use mpi" syntax provide some level of parameter checking >>> through the mpi.mod module. >>> If you are careful when you write your MPI calls, >>> and check if all parameters match the syntax requirements strictly, >>> this shouldn't be a problem, though. >>> (Nevertheless, a few days ago somebody was suffering here on the list >>> with a >>> problem that was just >>> a missing "ierr" parameter in an MPI_Send call. Jeff found it out, >>> after >>> several emails back and forth.) >>> >>> If not for anything else, just for the fun of it, to see how far the >>> compilation goes, >>> I would comment out "use mpi" and replace it by "include mpif.h". >>> >>> As for architecture and compiler, I have used with no problem OpenMPI >>> (and >>> MPICH2 and MPICH-1) on various >>> x86 and x86_64 machines, both AMD and Intel, under different Linux >>> flavors >>> (Fedora, CentOS, Red Hat), >>> in standalone machines (using SMP and shared memory), >>> and on a small cluster using Ethernet 100T , then using Gigabit >>> Ethernet, >>> compiling it with gcc and ifort and with gcc and pgf90. >>> >>> Note that I don't have icc, I use gcc and g++. >>> Are the icc and ifort versions that you have the same? >>> I don't know if different versions may not mix well, but it is a >>> possibility. >>> >>> I tried to reproduce your problem by writing a simple hello_f90.f90 >>> program, >>> with the "use mpi" syntax, >>> and compiling it with the OpenMPI mpif90. >>> However, the program compiled without any problem, >>> and I didn't need to point to the mpi.mod directory using the "-module" >>> flag >>> either, >>> despite my having a "gfortran-openmpi" version of mpi.mod in >>> /usr/lib/openmpi/. >>> The program runs fine too, with 2 processes, 4 processes, etc. >>> >>> On your first message on this thread, your configure command declares >>> environment >>> variables for CC, CXX, F77, and FC without full paths. >>> I wonder if there is any chance that there are multiple versions of Intel >>> compilers on your >>> system, that somehow may be the cause for the confusion (perhaps as early >>> as >>> the build time). >>> >>> Also, note that mpi.mod is not an include file. >>> It is located in the lib directory of openmpi. >>> There was some confusion about this before, with a discussion about "-I" >>> directories, etc, >>> but hopefully this was clarified already. >>> >>> Another thing to check is if there is any funny compiler configuration >>> (say >>> in /opt/intel/fc/bla/bla/ifort.cfg). >>> >>> Yet another thing I would look at are the logs for OpenMPI configure, >>> make, >>> and make install, >>> if you saved them, to see if the Fortran90 interface was built to >>> completion. >>> >>> Also, a suggestion is to compile with the verbose "-v" option, to see if >>> it >>> spits out some >>> clue to what is going on. >>> I hope this helps. >>> >>> Gus Correa >>> (from the stamp-collecting side of science :) ) >>> >>> -- >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> Gustavo J. Ponce Correa, PhD - Email: g...@ldeo.columbia.edu >>> Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory - Columbia University >>> P.O. Box 1000 [61 Route 9W] - Palisades, NY, 10964-8000 - USA >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> >>> Brian Harker wrote: >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Hi guys- >>>> >>>> Still no dice. The only mpi.mod files I have are the ones generated >>>> from my compile and build from source (and they are where they should >>>> be), so there's definitely no confusion amongst the modules. And >>>> specifying the fulls path to the correct mpi.mod module (like Gus >>>> suggested with the -module option) gives no change. I am running out >>>> of ideas and patience, as I'm sure you all are too! Perhaps openMPI >>>> just doesn't play nice with my compiler suite and hardware >>>> architecture...? Thanks for all the input! >>>> >>>> On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 11:27 AM, Gus Correa <g...@ldeo.columbia.edu> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi Brian and list >>>>> >>>>> I read your original posting and Jeff's answers. >>>>> >>>>> Here on CentOS from Rocks Cluster I have a "native" OpenMPI, with a >>>>> mpi.mod, >>>>> compiled with gfortran. >>>>> Note that I don't even have gfortran installed! >>>>> This is besides the MPI versions (MPICH2 and OpenMPI) >>>>> I installed from scratch using combinations of ifort and pgi with gcc. >>>>> It may be that mpif90 is not picking the right mpi.mod, as Jeff >>>>> suggested. >>>>> Something like this may be part of your problem. >>>>> A "locate mpi.mod" should show what your system has. >>>>> >>>>> Have you tried to force the directory where mpi.mod is searched for? >>>>> Something like this: >>>>> >>>>> /full/path/to/openmpi/bin/mpif90 -module >>>>> /full/path/to/openmpi_mpi.mod_directory/ hello_f90.f90 >>>>> >>>>> The ifort man pages has the "-module" syntax details. >>>>> >>>>> I hope this helps. >>>>> >>>>> Gus Correa >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> Gustavo J. Ponce Correa, PhD - Email: g...@ldeo.columbia.edu >>>>> Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory - Columbia University >>>>> P.O. Box 1000 [61 Route 9W] - Palisades, NY, 10964-8000 - USA >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Brian Harker wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Gus- >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks for the input. I have been using full path names to both the >>>>>> wrapper compilers and mpiexec from the first day I had two MPI >>>>>> implementations on my machine, depending on if I want to use MPICH or >>>>>> openMPI, but still the problem remains. ARGGGGGG! >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 9:40 AM, Gus Correa <g...@ldeo.columbia.edu> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hello Brian and list >>>>>>> >>>>>>> My confusing experiences with multiple MPI implementations >>>>>>> were fixed the day I decided to use full path names to the MPI >>>>>>> compiler >>>>>>> wrappers (mpicc, mpif77, etc) at compile time, >>>>>>> and to the MPI job launcher (mpirun, mpiexec, and so on) at run time, >>>>>>> and to do this in a consistent fashion (using the tools from the same >>>>>>> install to compile and to run the programs). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Most Linux distributions come with built in MPI implementations >>>>>>> (often >>>>>>> times >>>>>>> more than one), >>>>>>> and so do commercial compilers and other tools. >>>>>>> You end up with a mess of different MPI versions on your "native" >>>>>>> PATH, >>>>>>> as well as variety of bin, lib, and include directories containing >>>>>>> different >>>>>>> MPI stuff. >>>>>>> The easy way around is to use full path names, particularly if you >>>>>>> install >>>>>>> yet another MPI implementation >>>>>>> from scratch. >>>>>>> Another way is to fix your PATH on your initialization files (.cshrc, >>>>>>> etc) >>>>>>> to point to your preferred implementation (put the appropriate bin >>>>>>> directory >>>>>>> ahead of everything else). >>>>>>> Yet another is to install the "environment modules" package on your >>>>>>> system >>>>>>> and use it consistently. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> My two cents. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Gus Correa >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> Gustavo J. Ponce Correa, PhD - Email: g...@ldeo.columbia.edu >>>>>>> Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory - Columbia University >>>>>>> P.O. Box 1000 [61 Route 9W] - Palisades, NY, 10964-8000 - USA >>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Brian Harker wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I built and installed both MPICH2 and openMPI from source, so no >>>>>>>> distribution packages or anything. MPICH2 has the modules located >>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>> /usr/local/include, which I assume would be found (since its in my >>>>>>>> path), were it not for specifying -I$OPENMPI_HOME/lib at compile >>>>>>>> time, >>>>>>>> right? I can't imagine that if you tell it where to look for the >>>>>>>> correct modules, it would search through your path first before >>>>>>>> going >>>>>>>> to where you tell it to go. Or am I too optimistic? Thanks again >>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>> the input! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 8:58 AM, Jeff Squyres <jsquy...@cisco.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Sep 22, 2008, at 10:10 AM, Brian Harker wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the reply...crap, $HOME/openmpi/lib does contains all >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> various lilbmpi* files as well as mpi.mod, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> That should be correct. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> but still get the same >>>>>>>>>> error at compile-time. Yes, I made sure to specifically build >>>>>>>>>> openMPI >>>>>>>>>> with ifort 10.1.012, and did run the --showme command right after >>>>>>>>>> installation to make sure the wrapper compiler was using ifort as >>>>>>>>>> well. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Ok, good. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Before posting to this mailing list, I did uninstall and >>>>>>>>>> re-install >>>>>>>>>> openMPI several times to make sure I had a clean install. Still >>>>>>>>>> no >>>>>>>>>> luck. :( >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Ok. Have you checked around your machine to ensure that there is >>>>>>>>> no >>>>>>>>> other >>>>>>>>> mpi.mod that the compiler is finding first? E.g., in your MPICH2 >>>>>>>>> installation? Or is Open MPI installed by your distro, perchance? >>>>>>>>> You >>>>>>>>> might want to try a "rpm -qa | grep openmpi" (or whatever your >>>>>>>>> distro's >>>>>>>>> equivalent is to check already-installed packages). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Jeff Squyres >>>>>>>>> Cisco Systems >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> users mailing list >>>>>>>>> us...@open-mpi.org >>>>>>>>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> users mailing list >>>>>>> us...@open-mpi.org >>>>>>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> users mailing list >>>>> us...@open-mpi.org >>>>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> users mailing list >>> us...@open-mpi.org >>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > users mailing list > us...@open-mpi.org > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users > -- Cheers, Brian brian.har...@gmail.com "In science, there is only physics; all the rest is stamp-collecting." -Ernest Rutherford
