Fortran Allocate Error
Contents |
LearningModern CodeNetworkingOpen SourceStorageToolsDeveloper TypeEmbedded SystemsGame DevMediaTechnical, Enterprise, HPCWebOSAll ToolsAndroid*HTML5Linux*OS X*Windows*ResourcesCode SamplesContact SupportDocumentationFree SoftwareIntel Registration CenterProduct ForumsSDKsResourcesPartner with IntelAcademic ProgramPartner SpotlightBlack Belt DeveloperDeveloper MeshInnovator ProgramSuccess StoriesLearnBlogBusiness TipsEventsVideosSupportContact SupportDeveloper EvangelistsFAQsForums Search form Search You are hereHome fortran allocate stat › Forums › IntelĀ® Software Development Products › IntelĀ® Visual
Fortran 77 Dynamic Memory Allocation
Fortran Compiler for Windows* FacebookLinkedInTwitterDiggDeliciousGoogle Plus What (else) can cause an allocation error 41? What (else) can fortran dynamic memory allocation cause an allocation error 41? eos pengwern Fri, 06/03/2011 - 08:15 I have a Fortran DLL called from a C++ application which has now been running very fortran 90 deallocate reliably for a long time. Recently we refactored the C++ application and have found that in one very particular (and reproducible) set of circumstances, a call to a Fortran routine which allocates a ~120MB block of memory [using "allocate (..., STAT = alloc_err)"] fails with error code 41, 'FOR$IOS_INSVIRMEM', indicating: "The Intel Fortran RTL attempted
Fortran Memory Allocation
to exceed its available virtual memory while dynamically allocating space. To overcome this problem, investigate increasing the data limit. Before you try to run this program again, wait until the new system resources take effect." The error does not occur if I reduce the size of the block requested. On the face of it, what's happening should be bloomin' obvious: I've run out of memory. However: - I can check the memory footprint of the application when this happens, and it's never particularly large; always <1GB, whereas when it's working properly the same application regularly consumes up to about 1.5GB without complaining. - my computer runs 64-bit Windows 7 and has 8GB of physical memory; according to Task Manager, when the failure occurs the total physical memory usage is never more than ~55%. - the same Fortran code called from the same C++ code compiled with different options runs flawlessly. Basically, we can compile the C++ application as either a single executabl
User account creation filtered due to spam. Bug50937 - STAT option with ALLOCATE statement on large arrays Summary: STAT option with ALLOCATE statement on allocatable array fortran large arrays Status: RESOLVED INVALID Alias: None Product: gcc Classification: Unclassified Component: fortran automatic array fortran (show other bugs) Version: 4.4.3 Importance: P3 minor Target Milestone: --- Assignee: Not yet assigned to anyone URL: Keywords:
Fortran Deallocate
Depends on: Blocks: Reported: 2011-10-31 17:21 UTC by fwi Modified: 2011-11-01 12:00 UTC (History) CC List: 3 users (show) fwi jb kargl See Also: Host: Target: Build: Known to work: Known https://software.intel.com/en-us/forums/intel-visual-fortran-compiler-for-windows/topic/283525 to fail: Last reconfirmed: Attachments Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.) Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug. Description fwi 2011-10-31 17:21:08 UTC I'm reporting something that looks like a bug, at least I can't imagine how this behavior could be considered right, but I admit I haven't read the entire C and Fortran https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50937 specifications that gfortran is following. When specifying the "STAT" option with the ALLOCATE statement, no error is returned for some extremely large arrays that obviously can not fit into memory. test.f90: PROGRAM MAIN IMPLICIT NONE DOUBLE PRECISION, ALLOCATABLE :: E(:,:,:,:) INTEGER :: N, ierr CHARACTER(LEN=32) :: arg CALL get_command_argument(1, arg) READ(arg,*) N ALLOCATE(E(N,N,N,N),STAT=ierr) IF (ierr/=0) THEN PRINT *,'Could not allocate array of size ',N,'**4, error code=', ierr ELSE PRINT *,'Sucesfully allocated array of size ',N,'**4' E(N,N,N,N)=1.0D0 DEALLOCATE(E) ENDIF END PROGRAM MAIN Run with: $ gfortran test.f90; for i in `seq -w 10 10 400`; do ./a.out $i; done Sucesfully allocated array of size 10 **4 Sucesfully allocated array of size 20 **4 Sucesfully allocated array of size 30 **4 Sucesfully allocated array of size 40 **4 Sucesfully allocated array of size 50 **4 Sucesfully allocated array of size 60 **4 Sucesfully allocated array of size 70 **4 Sucesfully allocated array of size 80 **4 Sucesfully allocated array of size 90 **4 Sucesfully allocated array of size 100 **4 Sucesfully allocated array of size 110 **4 Sucesfully allocated array of size 120 **4 Could not allocate array of size 130 **4, error co
here for a quick overview of the site Help Center Detailed answers to any questions you might http://stackoverflow.com/questions/30803916/fortran-memory-allocation-does-not-give-an-error-but-the-program-is-killed-by-o have Meta Discuss the workings and policies of this site About http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~szymansk/OOF90/bugs.html Us Learn more about Stack Overflow the company Business Learn more about hiring developers or posting ads with us Stack Overflow Questions Jobs Documentation Tags Users Badges Ask Question x Dismiss Join the Stack Overflow Community Stack Overflow is a community of 4.7 million programmers, memory allocation just like you, helping each other. Join them; it only takes a minute: Sign up Fortran memory allocation does not give an error, but the program is killed by OS at initialization up vote 4 down vote favorite 1 Given the minimal working example provided below, do you know why the memory allocation error does dynamic memory allocation not occur at memory allocation step? As I checked, when I use valgrind to run the code, or add parameter source=0.0 to memory allocation statement, then I have, as expected, the memory allocation error. Update: I reproduced the issue with minimal working example: program memory_test implicit none double precision, dimension(:,:,:,:), allocatable :: sensitivity double precision, allocatable :: sa(:) double precision, allocatable :: sa2(:) integer :: ierr,nnz integer :: nx,ny,nz,ndata nx = 50 ny = 50 nz = 100 ndata = 1600 allocate(sensitivity(nx,ny,nz,ndata),stat=ierr) sensitivity = 1.0 nnz = 100000000 !allocate(sa(nnz),source=dble(0.0),stat=ierr) allocate(sa(nnz),stat=ierr) if(ierr /= 0) print*, 'Memory error!' !allocate(sa2(nnz),source=dble(0.0),stat=ierr) allocate(sa2(nnz),stat=ierr) if(ierr /= 0) print*, 'Memory error!' print*, 'Start initialization' sa = 0.0 sa2 = 0.0 print*, 'End initialization' end program memory_test When I run it I have no message 'Memory error!' printed, but have message 'Start initialization' and then the program is killed by OS. If I use memory allocation with 'source' parameter (as commented in the code) only then I have message 'Memory error!'. For memor
can share your pain. Topics These "gotchas" are nasty because they will not fail on some machines, while failing on others (given various combinations of compilers and machine platforms). Danger with Optional Arguments Danger with intent(out) A suprise with non-advancing I/O Suprise with locally initialized variables Danger of calling Fortran 90 style routines Danger with interfaces to Fortran 77 subroutines A suprise with generic functions Big Danger with Undefined Pointers Subtle danger with overloading (=) to assign pointers Danger with pointers to pointers Danger with Optional Arguments In this example an optional argument is used to determine if a header is printed. subroutine print_char(this,header) character(len=*), intent (in) :: this logical, optional, intent (in) :: header ! THIS IS THE WRONG WAY if (present(header) .and. header) then print *, 'This is the header ' endif print *, this end subroutine print_char subroutine print_char(this,header) character(len=*), intent (in) :: this logical, optional, intent (in) :: header ! THIS IS THE RIGHT WAY if (present(header)) then if (header) print *, 'This is the header ' endif print *, this end subroutine print_char Explanation The first method is not safe because the compiler is allowed to evaluate the header argument before the present function is evaluated. If the header argument is not in fact present an out of bounds memory reference could occur, which could cause a failure. Danger with intent(out) In this example we assign components of a derived type with intent(out). program intent_gotcha type mytype integer :: x real :: y end type mytype type (mytype) :: a a%x = 1 ; a%y = 2. call assign(a) ! a%y COULD BE UNDEFINED HERE print *, a contains subroutine assign(this) type (mytype), intent (out) :: this ! THIS IS THE WRONG WAY this%x = 2 end subroutine assign subroutine assign(this) type (mytype), intent (out) :: this ! THIS IS THE RIGHT WAY this%x = 2 ; this%y = 2. end subroutine assign end program intent_gotcha Exp