| Re: [eigen] 3.2-rc1 released! |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives
]
- To: eigen <eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [eigen] 3.2-rc1 released!
- From: Gael Guennebaud <gael.guennebaud@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 11:24:28 +0200
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=pjlFox27yE2//vvJMq8GHAG/P1jMLUu+Gz8q+7nZLOQ=; b=g3+VEWDElw2ZSbIdSZKeqOsGMB3pbDbgOW35LdVhku4xuxe+VRjtNpccx0g0O9+nS9 g+pxF+++PgPrIVnpL5zpgdBzqKd4xvvp77mHEaZO5HToJQWM+jPK0YD86IN4OGZAjsDC QUFAOb9xuWfcxiVLxsw4PI6bZtoiAQi+1c2dXJaR2/JJLvs35QoMyuyxhze9Mlc0U0Dw tRfEPC9DWJRIiaJGCskUTKNeinHR4JDMVa5ilqxEtgYPQUJ4x1LyWgnxNgOxw5DD54c2 fLwqfoagHjliA5aIcCdz5NExcP0upaU/fMHoe/wfkBI1O5S7asgFnvQxDfh6iPN4pz5w Z5Hw==
OK, regarding the ICE in unsupported/test/sparse_extra.cpp
- It was introduced by changeset: 39429a449b68
- For the record, with 3.2-beta1 this unit-test produced this strange
message from ICC 11:
An internal threshold was exceeded for routine
_Z14sparse_productIN5Eigen19DynamicSparseMatrixIfLi1EiEEEvv and
optimization level may be reduced. See
http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/internal-threshold-was-exceeded
for more information and advice.
- I managed to workaround this ICE by moving the
operator*(SparseBase,SparseSelfAdjointView) outside
SparseSelfAdjointView. However this change makes the official
test/sparse_product.cpp fails with the same ICE !! So that's even
worse.
gael
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Gael Guennebaud
<gael.guennebaud@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 4:50 AM, Rhys Ulerich <rhys.ulerich@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Eigen 3.2-rc1 has been released today (July 17, 2013).
>>
>> I ran 3.2-rc1 Nightly tests run atop an x86_64 GNU/Linux system with
>> -DEIGEN_TEST_OPENMP=ON for gcc 4.5, gcc 4.6, gcc 4.7, intel 11.1,
>> intel 12.1, and intel 13.1. All results are under machine
>> setun.ices.utexas.edu on the dashboard at
>> http://manao.inria.fr/CDash/index.php?project=Eigen&date=2013-07-17&display=project.
>>
>> On gcc 4.5 I see several test timings like
>> 223/643 Test #223: product_trmm_11 .................. Passed 25.42 sec
>> which look fishy to me. I am using -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=RelWithDebInfo.
>> Most tests are less than 2 seconds and many less than a 10th of a
>> second. product_trmm_* and lu_7 seem to be among the outliers.
>
> Yes observed that too, investigated a bit but I did not found anything
> special. These TRMM tests are heavy because there are numerous
> configuration that have to be tested and the matrices have to be
> larger than the blocking sizes to make sure everything is well tested.
> An idea would be to reduce these block-sizes for this test such that
> we can reduce matrix sizes as well.
>
>> On intel 11.1 there are some quite a few failed tests including a few
>> internal icpc error lovelies. Is it possible to keep the 3.2 release
>> from regressing any tests that had worked on 3.1?
>
> Yes, we are aware of that ICE too. It's concerning an unsupported
> unit-test, so not a blocker for me. We could try to bissect it to see
> if there might be an easy fix though.
>
> gael
>
>> Hope that helps,
>> Rhys
>>
>>