Intel® Advisor

Recent Advisor problems may be caused by PIN

Lately, we have been getting many reports of problems with the analysis tools (Inspector, Advisor, and VTune Amplifier) caused by a problem with PIN, the tool they use to instrument software.

PIN problems can produce several types of error. One of the more common ones is
__bionic_open_tzdata_path: PIN_CRT_TZDATA not set!

If you believe you may be affected, please see this article for more information.

Join the Intel® Parallel Studio XE 2018 Beta program


We would like to invite you to participate in the Intel® Parallel Studio XE 2018 Beta program. In this beta test, you will gain early access to new features and analysis techniques. Try them out, tell us what you love and what to improve, so we can make our products better for you. 

Registration is easy. Complete the pre-beta survey, register, and download the beta software:

Intel® Parallel Studio XE 2018 Pre-Beta survey

Methods to reduce OpenMP parallel overhead

I am a PhD student, and our lab is working to parallelize our finite element code using OpenMP. There are certain loops in which the calculations are not very computationally expensive, so these parallel loops only have a time savings if the number of iterations is very large; at fewer iterations, the parallel code is actually much slower than the sequential.

Accuracy of parallel vs. sequential computations

I have a finite element code in which I am trying to parallelize a subroutine. The difference in the results between parallel and sequential computation is around 1E-7. I read in the StackOverflow post linked below that floating point operations are not commutative, so one should not expect identical results when performing calculations in multithreaded codes. How large can this type of error become? After several thousand time steps, would an error of 1E-7 be understandable?

Suscribirse a Intel® Advisor