Hi,
Ok, the next step seems to be to find other candidate files
for low optimization building.
This will take me a while and Im under the gun now.
Perhaps someone that knows the codes or knows them even
better than me can jump in ?
Scott
On Tue, 22 May 2007, Peter Z. Qin wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Scott Brozell" <sbrozell.scripps.edu>
> To: <amber.scripps.edu>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 7:20 PM
> Subject: Re: AMBER: AMBER8 compiler with intel 9.1 compiler
>
>
> > ! <compile=optimized>
> > is irrelevant to non-humans.
> > Try really compiling ew_fft.f with low opts:
> >
> > cd src/sander
> > make sander
> > rm ew_fft.o
> > make -e FOPTFLAGS='$(FFLAGS)' ew_fft.o
> > make sander
> > then re-test
> >
> > This recipe is designed to be bullet proof to amber-builder-non-experts.
> >
>
> Followed your direction but the mdout.dhfr between the low and high opts has
> no difference!!
>
> This is what was done:
>
> 1. recompile serail with full opts
>
> make clean
> ./configure ifort
> make serial
>
> then test Run.dhfr with verbose = 2, save mdout.dhfr to mdout.dhfr.opts
>
> 2. compile sander with low opts
> > cd src/sander
> > make sander
> > rm ew_fft.o
> > make -e FOPTFLAGS='$(FFLAGS)' ew_fft.o
> > make sander
>
> re-test Run.dhfr. Diffing mdout.dhfr with mdout.dhfr.opts from 1.
>
> What next??
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The AMBER Mail Reflector
To post, send mail to amber.scripps.edu
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amber" to majordomo.scripps.edu
Received on Sun May 27 2007 - 06:07:47 PDT
