Page 1 of 1

abinit 6.2.1: problem compiling m_libxc_functionals.F90

Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 8:13 am
by sbecuwe
Hello,

I try to install Abinit 6.2.1 using Intel 11.x compilers, and the plugins mentioned on the webpage. Compilation stops with m_libxc_functionals.F90

m_libxc_functionals.F90(48): error #6457: This derived type name has not been declared. [XC_F90_POINTER_T]
m_libxc_functionals.F90(49): error #6457: This derived type name has not been declared. [XC_F90_POINTER_T]
m_libxc_functionals.F90(108): error #6457: This derived type name has not been declared. [XC_F90_POINTER_T]
m_libxc_functionals.F90(125): error #6460: This is not a field name that is defined in the encompassing structure. [CONF]
m_libxc_functionals.F90(125): error #6460: This is not a field name that is defined in the encompassing structure. [INFO]
m_libxc_functionals.F90(146): error #6784: The number of actual arguments cannot be greater than the number of dummy arguments. [XC_F90_INFO_REFS]
m_libxc_functionals.F90(146): error #6404: This name does not have a type, and must have an explicit type. [STR]
m_libxc_functionals.F90(149): error #6784: The number of actual arguments cannot be greater than the number of dummy arguments. [XC_F90_INFO_REFS]
m_libxc_functionals.F90(366): error #6404: This name does not have a type, and must have an explicit type. [XC_F90_INFO_PROVIDES]
m_libxc_functionals.F90(366): error #6404: This name does not have a type, and must have an explicit type. [XC_PROVIDES_EXC]
m_libxc_functionals.F90(366): warning #7319: This argument's data type is incompatible with this intrinsic procedure; procedure assumed EXTERNAL. [IAND]
m_libxc_functionals.F90(366): error #6404: This name does not have a type, and must have an explicit type. [IAND]
m_libxc_functionals.F90(387): error #6633: The type of the actual argument differs from the type of the dummy argument. [1]
m_libxc_functionals.F90(389): error #6633: The type of the actual argument differs from the type of the dummy argument. [1]
m_libxc_functionals.F90(391): error #6784: The number of actual arguments cannot be greater than the number of dummy arguments. [XC_F90_MGGA_VXC]

Any idea how to solve this problem?


Side question: why is the -xHOST option not used in the Intel optimization files?

Regards


Stefan Becuwe

Re: abinit 6.2.1: problem compiling m_libxc_functionals.F90

Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:50 am
by dcaliste
Hello,

Can you paste here the compilation line that raised these errors ? You should check also that the compilation of libXC succeeded and that the .mod files has been generated.

Damien.

Re: abinit 6.2.1: problem compiling m_libxc_functionals.F90

Posted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 12:43 am
by sbecuwe
Hello,

These are the last lines of compilation:

ifort -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../.. -I../../src/incs -I../../src/incs -I/easy/libxc/1.0-alpha-fixed-ictce-3.2.1.015.u1/include -I/easy/libxc/1.0-alpha-fixed-ictce-3.2.1.015.u1/lib/finclude -free -module /easy/abinit-6.2.1/src/mods -O2 -g -extend-source -vec-report0 -c -o m_libxc_functionals.o m_libxc_functionals.F90
ifort -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../.. -I../../src/incs -I../../src/incs -I/easy/libxc/1.0-alpha-fixed-ictce-3.2.1.015.u1/include -I/easy/libxc/1.0-alpha-fixed-ictce-3.2.1.015.u1/lib/finclude -free -module /easy/abinit-6.2.1/src/mods -O2 -g -extend-source -vec-report0 -c -o echo_xc_name.o echo_xc_name.F90
ifort -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../.. -I../../src/incs -I../../src/incs -I/easy/libxc/1.0-alpha-fixed-ictce-3.2.1.015.u1/include -I/easy/libxc/1.0-alpha-fixed-ictce-3.2.1.015.u1/lib/finclude -free -module /easy/abinit-6.2.1/src/mods -O2 -g -extend-source -vec-report0 -c -o hartre.o hartre.F90
m_libxc_functionals.F90(48): error #6457: This derived type name has not been declared. [XC_F90_POINTER_T]
type(xc_f90_pointer_t) :: conf ! the pointer used to call the library
---------^
[...]

As far as libXC concerns: that should be ok, since we've used libXC for previous versions of abinit, without problem.

Regards

Stefan

Re: abinit 6.2.1: problem compiling m_libxc_functionals.F90

Posted: Wed Aug 04, 2010 6:42 pm
by pouillon
sbecuwe wrote:Side question: why is the -xHOST option not used in the Intel optimization files?


Because the default optimizations for ifort 11 have not been configured yet.

Your problem looks to me as a preprocessing issue, which I find surprising with ifort. I have however no clue on how to solve this problem, since I can't reproduce it.