Ralph,
I will try to reproduce this.
I guess you already checked the output of ompi_info to confirm params are
checked at runtime.
Cheers,
Gilles
On Saturday, July 18, 2015, Ralph Castain <r...@open-mpi.org> wrote:
> Hi folks
>
> I keep getting segfault errors when testing 1.10, while others say the
> tests are passing for them. The tests are in the onesided area, but I don’t
> believe they necessarily are a onesided issue.
>
> Specifically, the tests (e.g., test_start1.c) call MPI_Win_set_errhandler
> with a NULL argument for the first parameter (MPI_win). Looking at the code
> for that function, I see this:
>
> int MPI_Win_set_errhandler(MPI_Win win, MPI_Errhandler errhandler)
> {
> MPI_Errhandler tmp;
>
> OPAL_CR_NOOP_PROGRESS();
>
> if (MPI_PARAM_CHECK) {
> OMPI_ERR_INIT_FINALIZE(FUNC_NAME);
>
> if (ompi_win_invalid(win)) {
> return OMPI_ERRHANDLER_INVOKE(MPI_COMM_WORLD, MPI_ERR_WIN,
> FUNC_NAME);
> } else if (NULL == errhandler ||
> MPI_ERRHANDLER_NULL == errhandler ||
> (OMPI_ERRHANDLER_TYPE_WIN !=
> errhandler->eh_mpi_object_type &&
> OMPI_ERRHANDLER_TYPE_PREDEFINED !=
> errhandler->eh_mpi_object_type) ) {
> return OMPI_ERRHANDLER_INVOKE(win, MPI_ERR_ARG, FUNC_NAME);
> }
> }
>
> /* Prepare the new error handler */
> OBJ_RETAIN(errhandler);
>
> /* Ditch the old errhandler, and decrement its refcount. On 64
> bits environments we have to make sure the reading of the
> error_handler became atomic. */
> do {
> tmp = win->error_handler;
> } while (!OPAL_ATOMIC_CMPSET(&(win->error_handler), tmp, errhandler));
> OBJ_RELEASE(tmp);
>
> /* All done */
> return MPI_SUCCESS;
> }
>
> If someone built with —with-mpi-param-check=always or runtime, then this
> function will return an error when given the NULL argument. Otherwise, it
> will definitely segfault. According to the configure output, this option is
> supposed to default to “runtime”. I don’t set it in my configury, so I
> would have thought this was the case. And when I look at the config.log, I
> see:
>
> configure:10401: checking if want run-time MPI parameter checking
> configure:10425: result: runtime
>
>
> However, what I’m seeing implies that this is *not* the case - i.e., we
> aren’t checking MPI params, and hence I am crashing. Does anyone have any
> thoughts on what could be going on? Is this test itself even correct?
>
> Ralph
>
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> de...@open-mpi.org <javascript:;>
> Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
> Link to this post:
> http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2015/07/17656.php
