![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
"Cassessory"
May 2017
Northern China
2×33 Posts |
![]()
I'm trying to run Mlucas on a Huawei Matepad pro 10.5" 2021, with Harmony OS 2.0.0(runs Android apps but said to be not Android), Snapdragon 870 and 8GiB RAM. I'm using all 8 cores and running v20.1.1 (02 Dec 2021).
After compiling, when running selftests I saw a lot of information lines as I quoted in the title. It repeats several times (roughly from 6 times to 12, as I see it) for each radix-set. For example: Code:
Using complex FFT radices .............. sched_setaffinity: Invalid argument sched_setaffinity: Invalid argument mers_mod_square: Init threadpool of 8 threads sched_setaffinity: Invalid argument sched_setaffinity: Invalid argument sched_setaffinity: Invalid argument sched_setaffinity: Invalid argument sched_setaffinity: Invalid argument sched_setaffinity: Invalid argument sched_setaffinity: Invalid argument sched_setaffinity: Invalid argument sched_setaffinity: Invalid argument Using 8 threads in carry step sched_setaffinity: Invalid argument So does this mean anything usual or terrible? Last fiddled with by leonardyan96 on 2022-01-10 at 13:02 Reason: Append some details |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
"Cassessory"
May 2017
Northern China
2·33 Posts |
![]()
These lines also appear when running single-threaded (omitting -cpu flags).
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
"Cassessory"
May 2017
Northern China
668 Posts |
![]()
After some search I learned this is a function provided by the Linux environment. I tried the following command, it successfully finished and that message still appeared twice.
Code:
./Mlucas -fft 192 -iters 100 -radset 0 -cpu 1 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
"Cassessory"
May 2017
Northern China
2×33 Posts |
![]()
According to what I found with some more tests, when I specify any cpu cores other than 2 and 3 the error message will appear. When -cpu 2, -cpu 3 or -cpu 2:3 the screen output gets clean. It might be something weird with the OS or SoC, but doesn't stop the FFT from being correctly finished.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Sep 2009
2×1,213 Posts |
![]()
What is in /proc/cpuinfo ? It sounds as if Linux thinks it only has CPUs 2 and 3.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
∂2ω=0
Sep 2002
República de California
5×2,351 Posts |
![]()
Echoed - some OSes do weird things with respect to physical and/or logical core numbering. An attempt to set a thread's affinity to a non-existent core (based on the OS' core numbering scheme, as captured in /proc/cpuinfo) will simply leave any thread affinity management to the OS, but obviously one would prefer to not get warning messages in one's runs.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
"Cassessory"
May 2017
Northern China
2×33 Posts |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
"Cassessory"
May 2017
Northern China
2×33 Posts |
![]()
Selftest just finished. In mlucas.cfg the timings look bad, from 2000 to 7000 ms/iter. Seems that it failed to utilize all the cores.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 | |
"Cassessory"
May 2017
Northern China
2×33 Posts |
![]() Quote:
I tried taskset yet doesn't work. I'm going to give up, since I'm not able to root it or flash a custom ROM, and I'm not planning to run Mlucas on it for a long term. It's purchased only a few months ago. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
"Cassessory"
May 2017
Northern China
2·33 Posts |
![]()
Just did another test on my daily phone with Snapdragon 835. It has 8 cores, among which little cores are 0-3 and big cores are 4-7.
The little cores can all be safely specified without any warning. However those big cores look tricky. Sometimes it's 4 and 5 which work, sometimes 4 & 6, and sometimes 5 & 7. It seems unstable. According to the timing, when I specify only 1 core and it warns "Invalid argument", the program seems to fall back to only one small core(cpu 0?). This is the slowest case. I'm not sure if root or custom ROM works. Qualcomm chips are really a pain in the ass... ![]() Last fiddled with by leonardyan96 on 2022-01-11 at 02:49 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 | |
∂2ω=0
Sep 2002
República de California
5·2,351 Posts |
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Is "mung" or "munged" a negative word in a moral sense? | Uncwilly | Lounge | 15 | 2020-04-14 18:35 |
GQQ: a "deterministic" "primality" test in O(ln n)^2 | Chair Zhuang | Miscellaneous Math | 21 | 2018-03-26 22:33 |
Stockfish game: "Move 8 poll", not "move 3.14159 discussion" | MooMoo2 | Other Chess Games | 5 | 2016-10-22 01:55 |
Aouessare-El Haddouchi-Essaaidi "test": "if Mp has no factor, it is prime!" | wildrabbitt | Miscellaneous Math | 11 | 2015-03-06 08:17 |
Would Minimizing "iterations between results file" may reveal "is not prime" earlier? | nitai1999 | Software | 7 | 2004-08-26 18:12 |