Compiling in gfortran with makefile - macos

I have received a bunch of .f95 files to be compiled. The only info included regarding its compilation is the order in which these has to be compiled and that the files are in free-form. Besides that there is a Makefile but it is a Makefile made for Intel Fortran Compiler. I know nothing about Fortran and just need to make use of the code. I do not have access to Intel Fortran Compiler and gfortran in macosx is my only available choice. I compiled similar code previously in a similar way and it worked fine. Nevertheless I get multiple errors and nothing happens.
As I said the MakeFile is not complex and is split in three main sections. How could I "translate" this to gfortran syntaxis and compile the code. Is there an equivalence of options between the two? I enclose an abridged version of the MakeFile.
Mine
% ifort -o BIN1.exe -O3 -diag-disable 8291 file1.f90 file2.f90 ....
% ifort -g -check bounds -o BIN1n.exe -O3 file1.f90 file2.f90 ....
% ifort -g -debug full -traceback -check bounds -check uninit -check pointers -check output_conversion -check format -warn alignments -warn truncated_source -warn usage -ftrapuv -fp-stack-check -fpe0 -fpconstant -vec_report0 -diag-disable 8291 -warn unused -o BIN.exe -O3 file1.f90 file2.f90 ....

You need to convert the ifort flags to gfortran flags. To the best of my knowledge this can only be done by reading the documentation of ifort and gfortran. I'm no expert but:
maybe -fpconstant can be replaced by -fdefault-real-8 (if I understand correctly this gfortran flag has the effect of the ifort flags -r8 and -fpconstant),
maybe -fpe0 can be replaced by using -ffpe-trap=XXX.
PS: You can find some equivalence at the page Compiling with gfortran instead of ifort

Related

Getting assember output from GCC/Clang in LTO mode

Normally, one can get GCC's optimized assembler output from a source file using the -S flag in GCC and Clang, as in the following example.
gcc -O3 -S -c -o foo.s foo.c
But suppose I compile all of my source files using -O3 -flto to enable link-time whole-program optimizations and want to see the final compiler-generated optimized assembly for a function, and/or see where/how code gets inlined.
The result of compiling is a bunch of .o files which are really IR files disguised as object files, as expected. In linking an executable or shared library, these are then smushed together, optimized as a whole, and then compiled into the target binary.
But what if I want assembly output from this procedure? That is, the assembly source that results after link-time optimizations, during the compilation of IR to assembly, and before the actual assembly and linkage into the final executable.
I tried simply adding a -S flag to the link step, but that didn't really work.
I know disassembling the executable is possible, even interleaving with source, but sometimes it's nicer to look at actual compiler-generated assembly, especially with -fverbose-asm.
For GCC just add -save-temps to linker command:
$ gcc -flto -save-temps ... *.o -o bin/libsortcheck.so
$ ls -1
...
libsortcheck.so.ltrans0.s
For Clang the situation is more complicated. In case you use GNU ld (default or -fuse-ld=ld) or Gold linker (enabled via -fuse-ld=gold), you need to run with -Wl,-plugin-opt=emit-asm:
$ clang tmp.c -flto -Wl,-plugin-opt=emit-asm -o tmp.s
For newer (11+) versions of LLD linker (enabled via -fuse-ld=lld) you can generate asm with -Wl,--lto-emit-asm.

How can a segfault happen at runtime only because of linking unused modules?

I get a segmentation fault from a memory allocation statement just because I have linked some unrelated procedures to the binary.
I have a very simple Fortran program:
program whatsoever
!USE payload_modules
double precision,allocatable:: Vmat(:,:,:)
allocate(Vmat(2,2,2))
Vmat=1
write(*,*) Vmat
deallocate (Vmat)
! some more lines of code using procedures from payload_module
end program whatsoever
Compiling this using gfortran whatsoever.f95 -o whatsoever leads to a program with the expected behaviour. Of course, this program is not made to print eight times 1.000 but to call the payload_modules, yet hidden in the comments. However, if I compile and link the program with the modules issuing
gfortran -c -g -fPIC -ffpe-trap=overflow -pedantic -fbounds-check \
-fimplicit-none payload_module1.f90 payload_module2.f90 whatsever.f95
gcc -g -nostdlib -v -Wl,--verbose -std=gnu99 -shared -Wl,-Bsymbolic-functions \
-Wl,-z,relro -o whatsoever whatsoever.o payload_module1.o payload_module2.o
the program whatsoever doesn't run any more. I get a segmentation fault at the allocate statement. I have not yet uncommented the lines related to the modules (however, uncommenting them leads to the same behaviour)!
I know that the payload modules' code is not buggy because I ran it before from R and wrapped this working code into a f90-module. There are no name collisions; nothing in the modules is called Vmat. There is only one other call to allocate in the modules. It never caused any trouble. There is still plenty of memory left. gdb didn't give me any hints expect a memory address.
How can linking routines that are actually not called crash a program?
Compiling your code with
gfortran whatsoever.f95 -o whatsoever
is working because you link against the system libraries, everything is in place. This would correspond to
gfortran whatsoever.f95 payload_module1.f90 payload_module2.f90 -o whatsoever
which would also work. The commands you used instead omit the system libraries, and the code fails at the first time you call a function from there (the allocation). You don't see that you are missing the libraries, because you create a shared object (which is typically linked against the libraries later on).
You chose to separate compiling the objects and linking them into an executable. Doing this for Fortran program using gcc you need to specify the Fortran libraries, so there's a -lgfortran missing.
I'm not sure about that particular choice of compile options... -shared is usually used for libraries, are you sure you want a shared binary (whatever that is)?
With -nostdlib you tell the compiler not to link against the system libraries. You would then need to specify those libraries (which you don't).
For the main program test.F90 and a module payload.F90, I run
gfortran -c -g -fPIC -ffpe-trap=overflow -pedantic -fbounds-check \
-fimplicit-none payload.F90 test.F90
gcc -g -v -Wl,--verbose -std=gnu99 -Wl,-Bsymbolic-functions \
-Wl,-z,relro -lgfortran -o whatsoever test.o payload.o
This compiles and executes correctly.
It might be easier to use the advance options with gfortran:
gfortran -g -fPIC -ffpe-trap=overflow -pedantic -fbounds-check \
-fimplicit-none -Wl,-Bsymbolic-functions -Wl,-z,relro \
payload.F90 test.F90 -o whatsoever
The result is the same.

What is the signification of LDFLAGS

I'm trying to compile AODV for ARM linux. I use a SabreLite as a board with kernel version 3.0.35_4.1.0. It's worth mention that i'm using openembedded to create my Linux Distribution for my board.
The AODV source code (http://sourceforge.net/projects/aodvuu/) has a README file which give some indications on how to install it on ARM as stated a bit here.
(http://w3.antd.nist.gov/wctg/aodv_kernel/kaodv_arm.html).
I was able to upgrade the makefile in order to be used with post 2.6 kernel version ( as stated above, i have the 3.0.35_4.1.0 kernel version).
So, basically, what i am trying to do is that i have to create a module (let's say file.ko) and then load it into the ARM (with insmod file.ko command).
To do that, i am using a cross compiler which some values are stated below:
echo $CC :
arm-oe-linux-gnueabi-gcc -march=armv7-a -mthumb-interwork -mfloat-abi=hard -mfpu=neon -mtune=cortex-a9 --sysroot=/usr/local/oecore-x86_64/sysroots/cortexa9hf-vfp-neon-oe-linux-gnueabi
echo $ARCH=arm
echo $CFLAGS: O2 -pipe -g -feliminate-unused-debug-types
echo $LD :
arm-oe-linux-gnueabi-ld --sysroot=/usr/local/oecore-x86_64/sysroots/cortexa9hf-vfp-neon-oe-linux-gnueabi
echo $LDFLAGS :
-Wl,-O1 -Wl,--hash-style=gnu -Wl,--as-needed -Wl,--as-needed
when i launch "make command", i get the following errors:
LD [M] /home/scof/script_emulation/AODV/aodv-uu/lnx/kaodv.o
arm-oe-linux-gnueabi-ld: unrecognized option '-Wl,-O1'
arm-oe-linux-gnueabi-ld: use the --help option for usage information
It states that there is something wrong with the linker. This linker comes from the cross compilation tools and i normally shouldn't touch it.
Anyway, to get this above errors fixed, i try to withdraw the LDFLAGS like this:
export LDFLAGS='',
and after this, the make command works and i get the module kaodv.ko. But when i insert it into my ARM to check, it does not work. It actually freeze my terminal
So my question is, do i have to specify the LDFLAGS when compiling ? Does withdrawing LDFLAGS can have impact on the generated kernel module.
Actually, i try to understand where might be the problem and the only thing that come to me is that may be i should not change manually the LDFLAGS. But if i don't change de LDFLAGS, i get the unrecognized option error.
My second question related to that is, what are the possibly value of LDFLAGS
in ARM compilation
Thanks !!
echo $LDFLAGS : -Wl,-O1 -Wl,--hash-style=gnu -Wl,--as-needed -Wl,--as-needed
There are two common methods of invoking the linker in a GCC-based toolchain. One is to do it directly, but another is to use GCC as a front end to invoke the linker, rather than invoke it directly. When doing this, options intended for the linker are prefixed with -Wl, so that GCC knows to pass them through rather than interpret them itself.
In your case the error message from LD itself
arm-oe-linux-gnueabi-ld: unrecognized option '-Wl,-O1'
Indicates that your build system is passing LDFLAGS directly to the linker, and not by way of GCC.
Therefore, you should remove the -Wl, prefix and your LDFLAGS would instead be
-O1 --hash-style=gnu --as-needed --as-needed
(the duplication of the last argument is probably pointless but benign)
-O1 is an option that tells the linker to optimize. I believe it something new, and your linker may be slightly out of date. Try removing -Wl,-O1, it should still work.

optimization and debugging options in Makefile

I wonder where to put the optimization and debugging options in Makefile: linking stage or compiling stage? I am reading a Makefile:
ifeq ($(STATIC),yes)
LDFLAGS=-static -lm -ljpeg -lpng -lz
else
LDFLAGS=-lm -ljpeg -lpng
endif
ifeq ($(DEBUG),yes)
OPTIMIZE_FLAG = -ggdb3 -DDEBUG
else
OPTIMIZE_FLAG = -ggdb3 -O3
endif
ifeq ($(PROFILE),yes)
PROFILE_FLAG = -pg
endif
CXXFLAGS = -Wall $(OPTIMIZE_FLAG) $(PROFILE_FLAG) $(CXXGLPK)
test: test.o rgb_image.o
$(CXX) $(CXXFLAGS) -o $# $^ $(LDFLAGS)
Makefile.depend: *.h *.cc Makefile
$(CC) -M *.cc > Makefile.depend
clean:
\rm -f absurdity *.o Makefile.depend TAGS
-include Makefile.depend
What surprises me is CXXFLAGS is used in linking. I know it is also used in the implicit rule for compiling to generate .o files but is it necessary to use it again for linking? Specifically, where should I put optimization and debugging: linking stage or compiling stage?
Short answer:
optimization: needed at compiler time
debug flag: needed at compile time
debugging symbols: need at both compile and linking time
Take note that the linker decides what bits of each object file and library need to be included in the final executable. It could throw out the debugging symbols (I don't know what the default behavior is), so you need to tell it not to.
Further, the linker will silently ignore options which do not apply to it.
To the comments:
The above are very general claims based on knowing what happens at each stage of compilation, so no reference.
A few more details:
optimization: takes two major forms: peephole optimization can occur very late, because it works on a few assembly instructions at a time (I presume that in the GNU tool chain the assembler is responsible for this step), but the big gains are in structural optimizations that are generally accomplished by re-writing the Abstract Syntax Tree (AST) which is only possible during compilation.
debug flag: In your example this is a preprocessor directive, and only affects the first part of the compilation process.
debugging symbols: Look up the ELF file format (for instance), you'll see that various bits of code and data are organized into different blocks. Debugging symbols are stored in the same file along as the code they relate to, but are necessarily kept separate from the actual code. As such, any program that manipulates these files could just dump it. Therefore both the compiler and the linker need to know if you want them or not.

Compilation error while porting from gfortran to ifort

I'm trying to port a program from gfortran to ifort (Intel Fortran Compiler 11). I'm stuck with two files that only compile with gfortran:
gfortran -x f77 -c daedrid.ff
gfortran -x f77-cpp-input -c daedris.ff
when I try to run intel fortran compiler with these files, I get:
ifort -fpp -c daedrid.ff
ifort: warning #10147: no action performed for specified file(s)
ifort -fpp -c daedris.ff
ifort: warning #10147: no action performed for specified file(s)
and no object files are created.
Now, how can I solve this problem o_O?
EDIT: Renaming the file extensions from ff to fpp
cp daedrid.ff daedrid.fpp
cp daedrid.ff daedrid.fpp
helps:
ifort -fpp -c daedrid.fpp
daedrid.fpp(1483): (col. 9) remark: LOOP WAS VECTORIZED.
daedrid.fpp(1490): (col. 11) remark: LOOP WAS VECTORIZED.
daedrid.fpp(1499): (col. 13) remark: LOOP WAS VECTORIZED.
ifort -fpp -c daedris.fpp
daedris.fpp(1626): (col. 9) remark: LOOP WAS VECTORIZED.
http://www.rcac.purdue.edu/userinfo/resources/black/userguide.cfm#compile_fortran_cpp
UPDATE: Is there a way to make the intel fortran compiler work without having to rename the files?
The options you're looking for are -Tf and -fpp (and optionally -fixed or -free. From ifort -help, the relevant lines are:
-Tf<file> compile file as Fortran source
-fpp[n] run Fortran preprocessor on source files prior to compilation
n=0 disable running the preprocessor, equivalent to no fpp
n=1,2,3 run preprocessor
-[no]fixed,-FI specifies source files are in fixed format
-[no]free, -FR specifies source files are in free format
So, all in all, if you have fixed-form source which needs preprocessing, you would use:
ifort -fpp -fixed -Tfa.ff
to compile file a.ff.

Resources