我有一个使用 openmp 的 CPP 代码。它链接到一个fortran90 代码。如果用一个线程运行，一切都很好。如果使用不同于 1 的任意数量的线程运行，则在退出 cpp 部分时会出现分段错误。代码的结果是准确的，没有任何错误。它运行平稳，直到该退出。与openmp相关的部分代码为：
#pragma omp parallel for shared(even_phi,odd_phi,odd_divisor,odd_start_index,odd_iter_index) private(ii,jj,kk,cc,io,pp,f1,f2,f3,f4,f5,f6,ff,tmp_phi) schedule(static)
for (kk=1; kk<nz-1; kk++)
{
cc = (kk-1)*(ny-2);
for (jj=1; jj<ny-1; jj++)
{
io = odd_start_index[cc];
pp = odd_iter_index[cc++];
for (ii=io; ii<maxElem; ii++)
{
f1 = even_phi[pp-odown];
f2 = even_phi[pp-oright];
f3 = even_phi[pp];
tmp_phi = odd_phi[pp];
f4 = even_phi[pp+1];
f5 = even_phi[pp+oleft];
f6 = even_phi[pp+oup];
ff = f1+f2+f3+f4+f5+f6;
odd_phi[pp] = odd_divisor[pp]*ff + c2*tmp_phi;
pp++;
}
}
}
这是一个标准的数值求解器代码。在没有 openmp 和 OMP_NUM_THREADS=1 的情况下也可以完美运行。如果使用更多线程执行，在几乎完全正常执行之后，Valgrinds 说：
==23723== Thread 20:
==23723== Jump to the invalid address stated on the next line
==23723== at 0x2A6EBBB8: ???
==23723== by 0x2A6EA515: ???
==23723== Address 0x2a6ebbb8 is not stack'd, malloc'd or (recently) free'd
==23723==
==23723==
==23723== Process terminating with default action of signal 11 (SIGSEGV)
==23723== Access not within mapped region at address 0x2A6EBBB8
==23723== at 0x2A6EBBB8: ???
==23723== by 0x2A6EA515: ???
==23723== If you believe this happened as a result of a stack
==23723== overflow in your program's main thread (unlikely but
==23723== possible), you can try to increase the size of the
==23723== main thread stack using the --main-stacksize= flag.
==23723== The main thread stack size used in this run was 1048576.
==23723==
==23723== HEAP SUMMARY:
==23723== in use at exit: 632,995,339 bytes in 101 blocks
==23723== total heap usage: 10,071 allocs, 9,970 frees, 1,257,933,743 bytes allocated
==23723==
==23723== Thread 1:
==23723== 6,992 bytes in 23 blocks are possibly lost in loss record 47 of 74
==23723== at 0x4A04A28: calloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:467)
==23723== by 0x35A0E11812: _dl_allocate_tls (dl-tls.c:300)
==23723== by 0x35A1E07068: pthread_create@@GLIBC_2.2.5 (allocatestack.c:571)
==23723== by 0x2A6EA981: ???
==23723== by 0x2A4C666E: ???
==23723== by 0x4C8DB7: solvermodule (in /home/tom/bin/solver)
==23723== by 0x4C6794: MAIN__ (qdiff4v.f90:749)
==23723== by 0x4C8DF9: main (in /home/tom/bin/solver)
==23723==
==23723== 30,276 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 50 of 74
==23723== at 0x4A0674C: operator new[](unsigned long) (vg_replace_malloc.c:305)
==23723== by 0x2A4C6394: ???
==23723== by 0x4C8DB7: solvermodule (in /home/tom/bin/solver)
==23723== by 0x4C6794: MAIN__ (qdiff4v.f90:749)
==23723== by 0x4C8DF9: main (in /home/tom/bin/solver)
==23723==
==23723== 30,276 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 51 of 74
==23723== at 0x4A0674C: operator new[](unsigned long) (vg_replace_malloc.c:305)
==23723== by 0x2A4C63BF: ???
==23723== by 0x4C8DB7: solvermodule (in /home/tom/bin/solver)
==23723== by 0x4C6794: MAIN__ (qdiff4v.f90:749)
==23723== by 0x4C8DF9: main (in /home/tom/bin/solver)
==23723==
==23723== 30,276 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 52 of 74
==23723== at 0x4A0674C: operator new[](unsigned long) (vg_replace_malloc.c:305)
==23723== by 0x2A4C63EA: ???
==23723== by 0x4C8DB7: solvermodule (in /home/tom/bin/solver)
==23723== by 0x4C6794: MAIN__ (qdiff4v.f90:749)
==23723== by 0x4C8DF9: main (in /home/tom/bin/solver)
==23723==
==23723== 30,276 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 53 of 74
==23723== at 0x4A0674C: operator new[](unsigned long) (vg_replace_malloc.c:305)
==23723== by 0x2A4C6415: ???
==23723== by 0x4C8DB7: solvermodule (in /home/tom/bin/solver)
==23723== by 0x4C6794: MAIN__ (qdiff4v.f90:749)
==23723== by 0x4C8DF9: main (in /home/tom/bin/solver)
==23723==
==23723== 39,232 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 57 of 74
==23723== at 0x4A0674C: operator new[](unsigned long) (vg_replace_malloc.c:305)
==23723== by 0x2A4C6369: ???
==23723== by 0x4C8DB7: solvermodule (in /home/tom/bin/solver)
==23723== by 0x4C6794: MAIN__ (qdiff4v.f90:749)
==23723== by 0x4C8DF9: main (in /home/tom/bin/solver)
==23723==
==23723== LEAK SUMMARY:
==23723== definitely lost: 160,336 bytes in 5 blocks
==23723== indirectly lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==23723== possibly lost: 6,992 bytes in 23 blocks
==23723== still reachable: 632,828,011 bytes in 73 blocks
==23723== suppressed: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==23723== Reachable blocks (those to which a pointer was found) are not shown.
==23723== To see them, rerun with: --leak-check=full --show-reachable=yes
==23723==
==23723== For counts of detected and suppressed errors, rerun with: -v
==23723== ERROR SUMMARY: 7 errors from 7 contexts (suppressed: 6 from 6)
gdb 说：
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
[Switching to Thread 0x7ffff5a04700 (LWP 23837)]
0x00007ffff7024bc2 in ?? ()
Missing separate debuginfos, use: debuginfo-install libgcc-4.4.6-4.el6.x86_64 libgfortran-4.4.6-4.el6.x86_64 libgomp-4.4.6-4.el6.x86_64 libstdc++-4.4.6-4.el6.x86_64
这显然没有帮助。我一直在玩 GOMP_STACKSIZE 和线程数，认为我可能有堆栈大小问题，但无济于事。
我错过了一些东西。也许有些愚蠢。而且找不到。