User ML: Building OpenMPI 5.0.8 or 5.0.9 with gcc 16

[devreal]

From the Open MPI user mailing list (https://www.mail-archive.com/users@lists.open-mpi.org//msg35483.html)

I'm trying to build openMPI 5.0.9 (or 5.0.8) with the latest version of Gnu compiler ( 16, built from the git repository) but it fails.

Is there a way to solve this recursive inlining detected ?

In function ‘mca_part_persist_start’,
inlined from ‘mca_part_persist_start’ at ../../../../../ompi/mca/part/persist/part_persist.h:500:23,
inlined from ‘mca_part_persist_start’ at ../../../../../ompi/mca/part/persist/part_persist.h:500:23,
inlined from ‘mca_part_persist_start’ at ../../../../../ompi/mca/part/persist/part_persist.h:500:23,
inlined from ‘mca_part_persist_start’ at ../../../../../ompi/mca/part/persist/part_persist.h:500:23,
inlined from ‘mca_part_persist_start’ at ../../../../../ompi/mca/part/persist/part_persist.h:500:23:
../../../../../ompi/mca/part/persist/part_persist.h:484:1: error: inlining failed in call to ‘always_inline’ ‘mca_part_persist_start’: recursive inlining

I've tried to unset the inlining directive in part_persist.h but it fails later with a multiply defined function.

I've set some option at config time for CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS:

-DOPAL_DISABLE_INLINE -DOMPI_DISABLE_INLINE --param max-inline-insns-single=2000

as first problem was insufficient max-inline-insns-single value but increasing the value to 2000 fails now with the recursive inlining detected.

Looking at https://github.com/open-mpi/ompi/blob/main/ompi/mca/part/persist/part_persist.h, I don't see the recursion. However, I also don't know why this function is defined in a header file and marked inline.

[yselkowitz]

Line 500 in 5.0.9 is now line 510 in main:

err = req->persist_reqs[0]->req_start(req->real_parts, req->persist_reqs);

The C files have:

ompi/mca/part/persist/part_persist_sendreq.c
29:    sendreq->req_base.req_ompi.req_start = mca_part_persist_start;
ompi/mca/part/persist/part_persist_recvreq.c
29:    recvreq->req_base.req_ompi.req_start = mca_part_persist_start;

That does look recursive. But the code hasn't changed in 5 years, so I'm not sure why only the latest GCC detects it.