On 2/8/2012 4:31 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Paul H. Hargrove, le Thu 09 Feb 2012 01:28:53 +0100, a écrit :
>> Option #4:
>> CFLAGS='-qhalt=e -qsuppress=1506-077'
>> Appears to work for me for xlc-8.0 and xlc-9.0.
> That still looks dangerous to me: we don't know whatever warning
> might be added in the future. I'd rather add -qhalt=e only for the
> sched_setaffinity test.
I don't recommend adding -qsuppress automatically, just documenting it
for users that need xlc-8 or xlc-9.
If nothing else, this "work-around" is now in the hwloc-devel archives
for the search engines.
Sorry that I wasn't clear on what I meant to do with those CFLAGS.
Regarding "we don't know whatever warning might be added in the future.":
"1506-077" is the number for this particular warning about invalid
So this suppresses ONLY the one message and should be pretty safe.
Based on looking at the constants, this message is being issued
ERRONEOUSLY by these compilers.
I do agree w/ Samuel that the BEST solution is to apply "-qhalt=e" ONLY
to the test(s) where one expects the compiler to through errors (rather
than warnings) for function calls with argument counts which don't match
the prototypes. At the moment, I am 90% certain that the "old
sched_setaffinity()" probe is the only one fitting that description.
Paul H. Hargrove PHHargrove_at_[hidden]
Future Technologies Group
HPC Research Department Tel: +1-510-495-2352
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Fax: +1-510-486-6900