|
From: Julian S. <js...@ac...> - 2006-09-20 23:37:40
|
Ah, ok. Sorry for the confusion. So either: - kernel-bug explaination applies, or - both 3.2.0 and 3.2.1 have the same, previously unknown bug J On Thursday 21 September 2006 00:32, Catherine Moroney wrote: > No, I got the error with both 3.2.0 and 3.2.1. I originally tried > 3.2.0 and that failed so I upgraded to 3.2.1. Same error. > > Catherine > > On Sep 20, 2006, at 4:29 PM, Julian Seward wrote: > > Hmm. 2.6.16 isn't exactly what you'd call an ancient and buggy kernel. > > > > But .. [thinks] isn't this a red herring? If 3.2.0 does > > not fail on your box when running your Fortran app but 3.2.1 does, > > then it has to be a regression in 3.2.1. That's what you're > > saying happened, right? > > > > Hmm. > > > > J > > > > On Thursday 21 September 2006 00:24, Catherine Moroney wrote: > >> Here's my kernel version number: > >> > >> cm...@si...:/data/L2TC/cmm/stereo_special_runs/larry > >> [80]>uname -rv > >> 2.6.16-1.2096_FC5 #1 SMP Wed Apr 19 05:14:26 EDT 2006 > >> > >> Catherine > >> > >> On Sep 20, 2006, at 4:21 PM, Julian Seward wrote: > >>>>> Are you doing something strange with floating point rounding, or > >>>>> other IEEE control word stuff (precision, exception handling) ? > >>>> > >>>> We've been seeing it on amd64 machines - see my postings on the > >>>> developer list a few months ago for details. > >>>> > >>>> What I see is the FPU control word changing precision from 64 bit > >>>> to 80 bit if I recall correctly. I'm pretty sure it's a kernel > >>>> bug though > >>> > >>> Ah, well remembered. Now you point it out that does sound vaguely > >>> familiar. > >>> > >>> Catherine, what kernel version are you using? It would be > >>> interesting > >>> to know if it's in the same ballpark as the ones Tom saw this > >>> problem on. > >>> > >>> J |