From: Brian Bennion (bennion1_at_llnl.gov)
Date: Fri May 18 2007 - 10:25:46 CDT
HI Leandro,
My guess is that the amd64 binary was built on a
machine where lib64/libc was the default
path. Now when running it on your Athlon64 which
appears to be capable of both 32 and 64bit modes
it is finding /lib/libc as the default
path. Just conjecture on my part though.
looking at the link line in your compile output I
can't find where it calls the system libraries
like libc.so.6. Can you send the makefile?
Confirm that /lib64/libc.so.6 exists on the new Athlon64 cluster.
My next guess would be to try unloading
/lib/libc from the loader config file
"ld_config.in" It should be in your /etc dir in
redhat on thealthlon64 machines.
Brian
At 05:25 AM 5/18/2007, Leandro Martínez wrote:
>Hi Brian,
>
>>/lib/libc.so.6 is being called and not /lib64/libc.so.6
>
>That's a good point. I have no idea why this library is being called
>instead of the 64 bit one, this happens with all namd 2.6 binaries
>we tested.
>
>- The output of the namd build is at
>http://limes.iqm.unicamp.br/~lmartinez/compilation.log
>
>- When I say that we are using a single node I meant the
>master and one node. Both Athlon 64 dual core machines, connected
>through a gigabit network. Thus the simulations are running
>with 4 cpus. When the simulation run only on the
>master (locally) it doesn't crash. The node is diskless.
>
>- The full set of files of our test is available at
>http://limes.iqm.unicamp.br/~lmartinez/namd-test.tar.gz
>Uncompressing it you will get a directory named namd-test.
>Inside it there is a "test.namd" file, which is the input file for
>namd. The binaries are not there, I can send you some of
>them if you like, but actually most tests were done with
>the binaries available at the NAMD site. We are using, for
>example,
>charmrun +p4 ++nodelist ./nodelist ++remote-shell ssh ./namd2 test-namd
>to run the simulation.
>
>I will try debugging some run which crashes.
>
>A relevant information is that I am now running the same test
>with a 32 bit binary of NAMD 2.5 (Actually NAMD 2.5 for Linux-i686-TCP),
>in our opteron cluster with Fedora 6.0 (15 nodes, 30 cpus)
>and it is running for 30 hours. A few more days and we will be happy on
>that at least. But note that we have tried running the same simulation
>with the NAMD 2.6 for Linux-amd64 binary, in the same
>cluster, and we got the segmentation violation error. I will be trying
>to run the old binary in our new Athlon 64 cluster to see if we get
>a more stable run.
>
>Thanks again,
>Leandro.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>When you say one node do you mean that the namd
>>job is running on a single computer with more
>>than 1 cpu? If this is true then the networking
>>problem is probably a red herring.
>>Do you mind sending appropriate files for me to test on our opteron clusters?
>>
>>The debugger could be gdb if running on one node
>>We typically use totalview
>>There are others that might be more friendly.
>>
>>I would also suggest a NAMD build that has a -g
>>switch turned on to collect more debug.
>>
>>At 01:39 PM 5/17/2007, Leandro Martínez wrote:
>> >Hi Brian, thank you very much for the answer. The stack traces I sent
>> >before were not obtained in the same hardware. The ones that I'm
>> >sending below are both from the same mini-cluster (one node), but
>> >different namd binaries, which I specify. As you will see, they are also
>> >the same kind of errors, but each one with a different stack trace.
>> >
>> >I also think there is some corruption of the
>> >data in transit, but I have no idea how to
>> track or solve it. We have in some
>> >of our previous attempts obtained errors in which "a atom moving too
>> >fast was detected", but the velocity was absurd only in one the three
>> >components, thus sugesting that that was corrupted data rather than
>> >an actual simulation issue. In our present configuration we have not
>> >seen this problem anymore, but only these "libc.so.6" issues.
>> >
>> >The network cards we have already changed once, and this problem
>> >appeared in two different clusters, so I wouldn't really bet that it is
>> >a hardware problem.
>> >
>> >Can you suggest some debugger? I'm not familiar with those.
>> >I have ran the simulation using ++debug but I couldn't get any
>> >meaningful information.
>> >
>> >Thanks,
>> >Leandro.
>> >
>> >These are the stack traces of three runs in the same cluster, same
>> >nodes, different binaries:
>> >
>> >1) Using home-compiled namd binary with no fftw:
>> >
>> >ENERGY: 10600 19987.4183 13118.5784 1321.5175
>> >124.6337 -252623.9701 24015.9942 0.0000
>> >0.0000 52674.4657 -141381.3625 296.7927
>> >-140902.1798 -140903.3821 298.0487 -1714.5778
>> >-1687.4130 636056.0000 -1638.2391 -1637.8758
>> >
>> >------------- Processor 0 Exiting: Caught Signal ------------
>> >Signal: segmentation violation
>> >Suggestion: Try running with '++debug', or linking with '-memory paranoid'.
>> >Stack Traceback:
>> > [0] /lib/libc.so.6 [0x2b770d18a5c0]
>> > [1] _ZN17ComputeHomeTuplesI8BondElem4bond9BondValueE10loadTuplesEv+0x597
>> >[0x4fc3b7]
>> > [2] _ZN17ComputeHomeTuplesI8BondElem4bond9BondValueE6doWorkEv+0x12ab
>> >[0x50a78b]
>> > [3]
>> >
>> _ZN19CkIndex_WorkDistrib31_call_enqueueBonds_LocalWorkMsgEPvP11WorkDistrib+0xd
>> >[0x6986bd]
>> > [4] CkDeliverMessageFree+0x30 [0x6eb1c0]
>> > [5] /home/lmartinez/namd-nofftw/./namd2 [0x6eb21f]
>> > [6] /home/lmartinez/namd-nofftw/./namd2 [0x6ec501]
>> > [7] /home/lmartinez/namd-nofftw/./namd2 [0x6eea9a]
>> > [8] /home/lmartinez/namd-nofftw/./namd2 [0x6eed48]
>> > [9] _Z15_processHandlerPvP11CkCoreState+0x130 [0x6efd68]
>> > [10] CmiHandleMessage+0xa5 [0x756e11]
>> > [11] CsdScheduleForever+0x75 [0x7571d2]
>> > [12] CsdScheduler+0x16 [0x757135]
>> > [13] _ZN9ScriptTcl7Tcl_runEPvP10Tcl_InterpiPPc+0x153 [0x676ec3]
>> > [14] TclInvokeStringCommand+0x64 [0x2b770cb626a4]
>> > [15] TclEvalObjvInternal+0x1aa [0x2b770cb63d9a]
>> > [16] Tcl_EvalEx+0x397 [0x2b770cb64367]
>> > [17] Tcl_FSEvalFile+0x1ed [0x2b770cba5f2d]
>> > [18] Tcl_EvalFile+0x2e [0x2b770cba5fee]
>> > [19] _ZN9ScriptTcl3runEPc+0x24 [0x677104]
>> > [20] main+0x201 [0x4c2671]
>> > [21] __libc_start_main+0xf4 [0x2b770d178134]
>> > [22] __gxx_personality_v0+0x109 [0x4bf739]
>> >Fatal error on PE 0> segmentation violation
>> >
>> >2) Using provided binary amd64-TCP:
>> >
>> >ENERGY: 9800 20072.8949 13201.1162 1343.0570
>> >131.8154 -253024.4316 24209.4947 0.0000
>> >0.0000 53016.0637 -141049.9898 298.7174
>> >-140572.1009 -140570.0247 299.2188 -1871.3003
>> >-1682.6774 636056.0000 -1712.7694 -1711.5329
>> >
>> >------------- Processor 0 Exiting: Caught Signal ------------
>> >Signal: segmentation violation
>> >Suggestion: Try running with '++debug', or linking with '-memory paranoid'.
>> >Stack Traceback:
>> > [0] /lib/libc.so.6 [0x2ae403d345c0]
>> > [1] _int_malloc+0xb6 [0x778758]
>> > [2] mm_malloc+0x53 [0x7785f7]
>> > [3] malloc+0x16 [0x77c5fc]
>> > [4] _Znwm+0x1d [0x2ae403bc0b4d]
>> > [5] _ZN11ResizeArrayI6VectorEC1Ev+0x28 [0x6767e0]
>> > [6] __cxa_vec_ctor+0x46 [0x2ae403bc22a6]
>> > [7] _ZN14ProxyResultMsg6unpackEPv+0x62 [0x6e83ca]
>> > [8] _Z15CkUnpackMessagePP8envelope+0x28 [0x787036]
>> > [9] _Z15_processHandlerPvP11CkCoreState+0x412 [0x785db2]
>> > [10] CsdScheduleForever+0xa2 [0x7f2492]
>> > [11] CsdScheduler+0x1c [0x7f2090]
>> > [12] _ZN7BackEnd7suspendEv+0xb [0x4ba881]
>> > [13] _ZN9ScriptTcl7Tcl_runEPvP10Tcl_InterpiPPc+0x122 [0x6fbfe0]
>> > [14] TclInvokeStringCommand+0x91 [0x80d9b8]
>> > [15] /home/lmartinez/teste-namd/./namd2 [0x843808]
>> > [16] Tcl_EvalEx+0x176 [0x843e4b]
>> > [17] Tcl_EvalFile+0x134 [0x83b854]
>> > [18] _ZN9ScriptTcl3runEPc+0x14 [0x6fb71e]
>> > [19] main+0x21b [0x4b6743]
>> > [20] __libc_start_main+0xf4 [0x2ae403d22134]
>> > [21] _ZNSt8ios_base4InitD1Ev+0x3a [0x4b28da]
>> >Fatal error on PE 0> segmentation violation
>> >
>> >3) Using amd64 (no-TCP)
>> >
>> >------------- Processor 0 Exiting: Caught Signal ------------
>> >Signal: segmentation violation
>> >Suggestion: Try running with '++debug', or linking with '-memory paranoid'.
>> >Stack Traceback:
>> > [0] /lib/libc.so.6 [0x2af45d3b35c0]
>> > [1] _ZN20ComputeNonbondedUtil9calc_pairEP9nonbonded+0x29f0 [0x5377b0]
>> > [2]
>> > _ZN20ComputeNonbondedPair7doForceEPP8CompAtomPP7Results+0x5da [0x52fc9e]
>> > [3] _ZN16ComputePatchPair6doWorkEv+0x85 [0x615dd1]
>> > [4] _ZN11WorkDistrib12enqueueWorkBEP12LocalWorkMsg+0x16 [0x728d16]
>> > [5]
>> >
>> _ZN19CkIndex_WorkDistrib31_call_enqueueWorkB_LocalWorkMsgEPvP11WorkDistrib+0xf
>> >[0x728cfd]
>> > [6] CkDeliverMessageFree+0x21 [0x786a6b]
>> > [7] _Z15_processHandlerPvP11CkCoreState+0x455 [0x786075]
>> > [8] CsdScheduleForever+0xa2 [0x7f18a2]
>> > [9] CsdScheduler+0x1c [0x7f14a0]
>> > [10] _ZN7BackEnd7suspendEv+0xb [0x4bab01]
>> > [11] _ZN9ScriptTcl7Tcl_runEPvP10Tcl_InterpiPPc+0x122 [0x6fc260]
>> > [12] TclInvokeStringCommand+0x91 [0x80cc78]
>> > [13] /home/lmartinez/teste-namd/./NAMD_2.6_Linux-amd64/namd2 [0x842ac8]
>> > [14] Tcl_EvalEx+0x176 [0x84310b]
>> > [15] Tcl_EvalFile+0x134 [0x83ab14]
>> > [16] _ZN9ScriptTcl3runEPc+0x14 [0x6fb99e]
>> > [17] main+0x21b [0x4b69c3]
>> > [18] __libc_start_main+0xf4 [0x2af45d3a1134]
>> > [19] _ZNSt8ios_base4InitD1Ev+0x3a [0x4b2b5a]
>> >Fatal error on PE 0> segmentation violation
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Wed Feb 29 2012 - 15:44:41 CST