Closed
Conversation
…e api documentation; add test for the case ringTime is not specified.
With these changes, I can successfully build PIO. I tested a standalone PIO build (i.e., outside of an ESMF build) with: CC=clang FC=gfortran cmake -DPIO_USE_MPISERIAL=ON -DPIO_ENABLE_TIMING=OFF -DPIO_ENABLE_EXAMPLES=OFF -DPIO_ENABLE_FORTRAN=OFF -DMPISERIAL_PATH=/Users/sacks/esmf/esmf1/src/Infrastructure/stubs/mpiuni -DPIO_ENABLE_TESTS=OFF . make VERBOSE=1
According to MPI documentation, most MPI routines check sendbuf, but some (MPI_Scatter, MPI_Scatterv and maybe others; note that these are not yet implemented yet in mpiuni) check recvbuf, and some (e.g., MPI_Sendrecv_replace) don't check for MPI_IN_PLACE at all. To make mpiuni respect the MPI standard in this respect, I have added an argument to MPIUNI_Memcpy saying whether to check the source (sendbuf), dest (recvbuf) or neither for equality with MPI_IN_PLACE. (We could probably get away with keeping things simpler by always checking both a and b for equality with MPI_IN_PLACE, but following the MPI standard in this respect seems marginally safer.)
Fix spack build action
…serve unit tests.
resolving conflicts.
I saw this issue with the nvhpc compiler; I'm not sure if other compilers would also have problems using 0 for the seed.
Enable PIO with mpiuni This PR enables building and running with the internal PIO when using mpiuni. This is especially relevant for people using ESMPy, since ESMPy is sometimes built without mpi – and this is apparently needed on many HPC systems (see also conda-forge/esmpy-feedstock#70). This resolves #131 .
Resolved Conflicts: src/Infrastructure/TimeMgr/src/ESMCI_Alarm.C
Member
|
I have updated this branch to v8.7.0b08, which is the latest point on develop that was easy to update to. (v8.7.0b09 brings in the new repeat capability to the ESMF Clock that @oehmke implemented; this involves conflicts with this branch.) The list of commits and changed files is much larger than I expect to see in this PR. I'm going to try opening a new PR for this branch in the hopes that it appears cleaner, like I expect. EDIT 2024-12-26: The new PR is #340. Indeed, that looks cleaner. |
Draft
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
11 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
ISSUES:
https://github.com/esmf-org/esmf-support/issues/11
POSSIBLE CONFLICT/DUPLICATE PR:
#29