Community
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Highlighted
Beginner
5 Views

Derived type with coarray component

Dear all, 

I am facing with a SIGSEGV that is "terrible" because I cannot reproduce always, sometimes occurs sometimes not and in any case the results are not as expected even when the SIGSEGV occurs. 

In the following there is the complete test that I am playing with 

module classes 
  implicit none 
  private 
  public :: wrapped_coarray 

  type :: wrapped_point 
    integer, allocatable :: point(:) 
    contains 
      procedure :: add => wrapped_point_add 
  end type wrapped_point 

  type :: wrapped_coarray 
    type(wrapped_point), allocatable :: caf(:)[:] 
  end type wrapped_coarray 

  contains 

    subroutine wrapped_point_add(self, to_add) 
      class(wrapped_point), intent(inout) :: self 
      integer,              intent(in)    :: to_add 
      integer, allocatable                :: point(:) 
      integer                             :: points_number 

      if (allocated(self%point)) then 
        points_number = size(self%point, dim=1) 
        allocate(point(1:points_number+1)) 
        point(1:points_number) = self%point 
        point(points_number+1) = to_add 
        call move_alloc(from=point, to=self%point) 
      else 
        allocate(self%point(1)) 
        point(1) = to_add 
      end if 
    end subroutine wrapped_point_add 
end module classes 

program test 
  use classes 
  implicit none 

  type(wrapped_coarray) :: foo 
  allocate(foo%caf(99)
  • ) call foo%caf(32)%add(this_image()) print*, foo%caf(32)%point end program test
  • Essentially, I have a "wrapped" coarray member, namely "caf", that is, in turn, a wrapper of an allocatable integer array, namely "point". 

    The very kind Michael Siehl has already pointed me to a good paper of Aleksandar Donev, see http://caf.rice.edu/documentation/Aleksandar-Donev-Coarray-Rationale-N1702-2007-09.pdf ;

    To my understanding the above test should be conforming: 

    1. "foo" is a scalar non allocatable; 
    2. the "caf" member is allocated, thus an implicit synchronization should happen; by the way, adding an explicit "sync all" after the allocation does not produce any changes. 

    Currently, I am sticking on only Intel Fortran 17.0.1. 

    I compile the test with 

    ifort -coarray -debug -check -warn -traceback -standard-semantics test.f90 

    To speedup my test, I on-the-fly modify my shell envs with: 

    export FOR_COARRAY_NUM_IMAGES=2 

    The SIGSEV (when occurs), generates the following output 

    ---log 
    a.out 
    forrtl: severe (174): SIGSEGV, segmentation fault occurred 
    In coarray image 1 
    Image              PC                Routine            Line        Source 
    a.out              000000000047ECB1  Unknown               Unknown  Unknown 
    a.out              000000000047CDEB  Unknown               Unknown  Unknown 
    a.out              000000000042DCF4  Unknown               Unknown  Unknown 
    a.out              000000000042DB06  Unknown               Unknown  Unknown 
    a.out              0000000000407359  Unknown               Unknown  Unknown 
    a.out              000000000040A926  Unknown               Unknown  Unknown 
    libpthread-2.24.s  00002B073ED40080  Unknown               Unknown  Unknown 
    a.out              00000000004051AB  MAIN__                     43  test.f90 
    a.out              0000000000403D2E  Unknown               Unknown  Unknown 
    libc-2.24.so       00002B073F170291  __libc_start_main     Unknown  Unknown 
    a.out              0000000000403C2A  Unknown               Unknown  Unknown 

    application called MPI_Abort(comm=0x84000004, 3) - process 0 
    forrtl: severe (174): SIGSEGV, segmentation fault occurred 
    In coarray image 2 
    Image              PC                Routine            Line        Source 
    a.out              000000000047ECB1  Unknown               Unknown  Unknown 
    a.out              000000000047CDEB  Unknown               Unknown  Unknown 
    a.out              000000000042DCF4  Unknown               Unknown  Unknown 
    a.out              000000000042DB06  Unknown               Unknown  Unknown 
    a.out              0000000000407359  Unknown               Unknown  Unknown 
    a.out              000000000040A926  Unknown               Unknown  Unknown 
    libpthread-2.24.s  00002B9DA38EC080  Unknown               Unknown  Unknown 
    a.out              00000000004051AB  MAIN__                     43  test.f90 
    a.out              0000000000403D2E  Unknown               Unknown  Unknown 
    libc-2.24.so       00002B9DA3D1C291  __libc_start_main     Unknown  Unknown 
    a.out              0000000000403C2A  Unknown               Unknown  Unknown 

    application called MPI_Abort(comm=0x84000002, 3) - process 1 
    ---end log 

    When the SIGSEV does not occur no output is produced, namely the line 44 is not executed (I think). The SIGSEV occurs un the calling of "add" procedure, even if the procedure does not contain nothing (all commented). 

    Can you tell me: 
    1. is the test standard conforming? 
    2. if it is, does Intel v 17.0.1 support such a coarray components? 

    Thank you in advance for any help! 

    My best regards. 

    0 Kudos
    2 Replies
    Highlighted
    5 Views

    This has been escalated as

    This has been escalated as issue DPD200416083. As we get more information about the investigation, this thread will be updated.

    Retired 12/31/2016
    0 Kudos
    Beginner
    5 Views

    Dear Steve,

    Dear Steve,

    you are great, thank you very much!

    0 Kudos