Sorry I lost track of this email thread. I got caught up with other things. I'm wondering whether you have tried compiling with fp-precise? I'm just wondering whether it could be a problem with Intel's optimization.

--Steve

Hi,

As James Healy mentioned in the post "[Users] Einstein Toolkit and modern AMD supercomputer", I found static_tov.par passed the test for the Intel issue. So some bns-generic codes would make NaNs. But less probable because the only bns-generic code would be NSTracker but I've already encountered the NaN production issue w/wo NSTracker.

NaNChecker itself could be suspected but both bns and tove tests are using NaNChecker.

Rather, it could be a generic issue of Intel compiler. There are some bugs reported and new features in handling NaNs for the case of ifx. Those look just irrelevant yet.

Hee Il 

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users@einsteintoolkit.org
http://lists.einsteintoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/users