Open MPI logo

Open MPI Development Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |   all Development mailing list

Subject: Re: [OMPI devel] openmpi-1.8.2rc2 and f08 interface built with PGI-14.7 causes link error
From: Paul Hargrove (phhargrove_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-07-30 18:50:13


I am not "screaming" for a return of support for the PGI compilers.
I will also note that "use mpi" works fine; only the F2008 support is

Rather than complain I am offering to help test any solution that might be
I will also note that Nathan and Howard both have accounts at NERSC that
allow then access to Hopper, the system I have used for testing (in
addition to whatever LANL has).


While the 13.6 version of pgf90 failed the PROCEEDURE test, I find that
14.1 and 14.4 both *pass* (at least when attempted manually)
So, the issues I've had are DIFFERENT from the originally reported issue.
That is consistent with the mpi_f08.mod file with the same timestamp as the
So, I am investigating the ORIGINAL problem once again with 14.4.


On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) <jsquyres_at_[hidden]
> wrote:

> On Jul 30, 2014, at 12:36 AM, Paul Hargrove <phhargrove_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > Unfortunately, this (and
> that followed)
> represent a REGRESSION in that between 1.8.1 and 1.8.2rc2 Open MPI has lost
> support for F08 with the PGI compilers.
> Yes, and the answer is for PGI to support more of the F2003 standard.
> Then there might be a hope for supporting the MPI F08 bindings. :-)
> Glib answer aside...
> The fact of the matter is that Fortran compilers are a nightmare of what
> specific Fortran features they support. As part of r31587 and r31588,
> there was a simplification made to the (already quite complex) F08 bindings
> in OMPI to only support Fortran compilers that support PROCEDURE.
> I don't think I realized that I would be cutting off PGI support with this
> change.
> That being said, unless someone really screams, I would greatly prefer not
> to put back in the "support compilers who do not support PROCEDURE" code
> because a) it creates the problem that we solved by taking that stuff out,
> b) it adds more complexity to the F08 bindings, and c) we'll have to solve
> the original problem a different way... and I don't know how to do that.
> :-\
> --
> Jeff Squyres
> jsquyres_at_[hidden]
> For corporate legal information go to:
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel_at_[hidden]
> Subscription:
> Link to this post:

Paul H. Hargrove                          PHHargrove_at_[hidden]
Future Technologies Group
Computer and Data Sciences Department     Tel: +1-510-495-2352
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory     Fax: +1-510-486-6900