Invalid WUs that aren't invalid

Author	Message
Ken_g6 Send message Joined: 1 Jan 15 Posts: 3 Credit: 6,756,743 RAC: 42,001	Message 5259 - Posted: 7 Jun 2019, 5:27:01 UTC Last modified: 7 Jun 2019, 5:27:30 UTC
Here's a stderr: 01:52:08 (4058): wrapper (7.2.26012): starting 01:52:08 (4058): wrapper: running llr64 ( -d -oPgenInputFile=input.prp -oPgenOutputFile=primes.txt -oDiskWriteTime=10 -oOutputIterations=50000 -oResultsFileIterations=99999999) 12:12:26 (2180): wrapper (7.2.26012): starting 12:12:26 (2180): wrapper: running llr64 ( -d -oPgenInputFile=input.prp -oPgenOutputFile=primes.txt -oDiskWriteTime=10 -oOutputIterations=50000 -oResultsFileIterations=99999999) SIGSEGV: segmentation violation Stack trace (11 frames): ../../projects/srbase.my-firewall.org_sr5/wrapper_26012-v2_x86_64-pc-linux-gnu(boinc_catch_signal+0x65)[0x41fa15] /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpthread.so.0(+0x11670)[0x7fbe3ef15670] ../../projects/srbase.my-firewall.org_sr5/wrapper_26012-v2_x86_64-pc-linux-gnu[0x464351] ../../projects/srbase.my-firewall.org_sr5/wrapper_26012-v2_x86_64-pc-linux-gnu[0x45f554] /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(+0x357f0)[0x7fbe3eb727f0] /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(nanosleep+0x2d)[0x7fbe3ec0a2ed] /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(usleep+0x34)[0x7fbe3ec3c334] ../../projects/srbase.my-firewall.org_sr5/wrapper_26012-v2_x86_64-pc-linux-gnu[0x433ca3] ../../projects/srbase.my-firewall.org_sr5/wrapper_26012-v2_x86_64-pc-linux-gnu[0x407ddd] /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0xf1)[0x7fbe3eb5d3f1] ../../projects/srbase.my-firewall.org_sr5/wrapper_26012-v2_x86_64-pc-linux-gnu[0x404f59] Exiting... 17:00:48 (3539): wrapper (7.2.26012): starting 17:00:48 (3539): wrapper: running llr64 ( -d -oPgenInputFile=input.prp -oPgenOutputFile=primes.txt -oDiskWriteTime=10 -oOutputIterations=50000 -oResultsFileIterations=99999999 -t4) 20:38:46 (3539): llr64 exited; CPU time 50504.952000 20:38:46 (3539): called boinc_finish See, there was a SIGSEGV. I think that happened when the WU was suspended. But then the computation was started over. That time it succeeded. Can you fix this?
ID: 5259 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

rebirther Volunteer moderator Project administrator Project developer Project tester Project scientist Send message Joined: 2 Jan 13 Posts: 7601 Credit: 44,264,218 RAC: 120	Message 5260 - Posted: 7 Jun 2019, 5:39:49 UTC - in response to Message 5259.
The error can produce bad results thats why the validator handled this as invalid.
ID: 5260 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

Ken_g6 Send message Joined: 1 Jan 15 Posts: 3 Credit: 6,756,743 RAC: 42,001	Message 5261 - Posted: 7 Jun 2019, 6:02:44 UTC - in response to Message 5260. Last modified: 7 Jun 2019, 6:03:53 UTC
Alright, how about fixing it in the wrapper? If the number of SIGSEGV's in stderr.txt is greater than the number of RESTARTs, restart LLR (delete the z-file) and write "RESTARTing" lines until the number of SIGSEGV's in stderr.txt equals the number of RESTARTs. Edit: Or, more simply, just abort the WU when there's a SIGSEGV in stderr.txt. Why are you using a different wrapper than PrimeGrid, anyway? (Doing the above would be a reason, but not a reason for not including a lot of features from said wrapper.)
ID: 5261 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

rebirther Volunteer moderator Project administrator Project developer Project tester Project scientist Send message Joined: 2 Jan 13 Posts: 7601 Credit: 44,264,218 RAC: 120	Message 5262 - Posted: 7 Jun 2019, 6:07:56 UTC - in response to Message 5261.
Alright, how about fixing it in the wrapper? If the number of SIGSEGV's in stderr.txt is greater than the number of RESTARTs, restart LLR (delete the z-file) and write "RESTARTing" lines until the number of SIGSEGV's in stderr.txt equals the number of RESTARTs. Edit: Or, more simply, just abort the WU when there's a SIGSEGV in stderr.txt. Why are you using a different wrapper than PrimeGrid, anyway? (Doing the above would be a reason, but not a reason for not including a lot of features from said wrapper.) Iam using an older wrapper from primegrid. The latest wrapper is hardcoded for primegrid.
ID: 5262 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

crashtech Send message Joined: 10 Apr 19 Posts: 29 Credit: 913,392,084 RAC: 2,232,294	Message 5264 - Posted: 7 Jun 2019, 14:44:24 UTC
If we have work in our queues, is there a quick way to determine which of them will produce these errors, so they can be aborted before being allowed to waste CPU cycles?
ID: 5264 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

rebirther Volunteer moderator Project administrator Project developer Project tester Project scientist Send message Joined: 2 Jan 13 Posts: 7601 Credit: 44,264,218 RAC: 120	Message 5265 - Posted: 7 Jun 2019, 15:14:41 UTC - in response to Message 5264.
If we have work in our queues, is there a quick way to determine which of them will produce these errors, so they can be aborted before being allowed to waste CPU cycles? No.
ID: 5265 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

rebirther Volunteer moderator Project administrator Project developer Project tester Project scientist Send message Joined: 2 Jan 13 Posts: 7601 Credit: 44,264,218 RAC: 120	Message 5267 - Posted: 7 Jun 2019, 15:48:39 UTC
SIGSEGV: segmentation violation ok, I have excluded this error for now in the validator (srbase2 app). Will check the results later.
ID: 5267 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

biodoc Send message Joined: 6 May 18 Posts: 1 Credit: 358,879,050 RAC: 4	Message 5270 - Posted: 7 Jun 2019, 18:22:31 UTC Last modified: 7 Jun 2019, 18:22:52 UTC
I have 42 tasks marked as invalid due to SIGSEGB: segmentation violation. http://srbase.my-firewall.org/sr5/results.php?userid=1833&offset=0&show_names=0&state=5&appid= I'm new to the project so I added the project on 4 computers and long 0.22 tasks were downloaded and started running in single thread mode. I added the proper app_config.xml file for running the app in mt mode and then restarted boinc for all 4 computers. Apparently tasks labeled as "waiting to run" were eventually processed and then were marked as invalid. I guess I should have aborted the tasks after restarting boinc and downloaded new ones.
ID: 5270 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

rebirther Volunteer moderator Project administrator Project developer Project tester Project scientist Send message Joined: 2 Jan 13 Posts: 7601 Credit: 44,264,218 RAC: 120	Message 5271 - Posted: 7 Jun 2019, 18:25:39 UTC
I have removed all segmentation violation from validator. All tasks should be now valid.
ID: 5271 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

crashtech Send message Joined: 10 Apr 19 Posts: 29 Credit: 913,392,084 RAC: 2,232,294	Message 5272 - Posted: 7 Jun 2019, 18:31:08 UTC - in response to Message 5271.
@rebirther , thank you very much for your help!
ID: 5272 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

Author

Message

Ken_g6
Send message
Joined: 1 Jan 15
Posts: 3
Credit: 6,756,743
RAC: 42,001
10k in Sierpinski / Riesel Base credit

100k in Sierpinski / Riesel Base - short credit

1M in Sierpinski / Riesel Base - long credit

500k in Sierpinski / Riesel Base - average credit

Here's a stderr:

01:52:08 (4058): wrapper (7.2.26012): starting 01:52:08 (4058): wrapper: running llr64 ( -d -oPgenInputFile=input.prp -oPgenOutputFile=primes.txt -oDiskWriteTime=10 -oOutputIterations=50000 -oResultsFileIterations=99999999) 12:12:26 (2180): wrapper (7.2.26012): starting 12:12:26 (2180): wrapper: running llr64 ( -d -oPgenInputFile=input.prp -oPgenOutputFile=primes.txt -oDiskWriteTime=10 -oOutputIterations=50000 -oResultsFileIterations=99999999) SIGSEGV: segmentation violation Stack trace (11 frames): ../../projects/srbase.my-firewall.org_sr5/wrapper_26012-v2_x86_64-pc-linux-gnu(boinc_catch_signal+0x65)[0x41fa15] /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpthread.so.0(+0x11670)[0x7fbe3ef15670] ../../projects/srbase.my-firewall.org_sr5/wrapper_26012-v2_x86_64-pc-linux-gnu[0x464351] ../../projects/srbase.my-firewall.org_sr5/wrapper_26012-v2_x86_64-pc-linux-gnu[0x45f554] /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(+0x357f0)[0x7fbe3eb727f0] /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(nanosleep+0x2d)[0x7fbe3ec0a2ed] /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(usleep+0x34)[0x7fbe3ec3c334] ../../projects/srbase.my-firewall.org_sr5/wrapper_26012-v2_x86_64-pc-linux-gnu[0x433ca3] ../../projects/srbase.my-firewall.org_sr5/wrapper_26012-v2_x86_64-pc-linux-gnu[0x407ddd] /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0xf1)[0x7fbe3eb5d3f1] ../../projects/srbase.my-firewall.org_sr5/wrapper_26012-v2_x86_64-pc-linux-gnu[0x404f59] Exiting... 17:00:48 (3539): wrapper (7.2.26012): starting 17:00:48 (3539): wrapper: running llr64 ( -d -oPgenInputFile=input.prp -oPgenOutputFile=primes.txt -oDiskWriteTime=10 -oOutputIterations=50000 -oResultsFileIterations=99999999 -t4) 20:38:46 (3539): llr64 exited; CPU time 50504.952000 20:38:46 (3539): called boinc_finish

See, there was a SIGSEGV. I think that happened when the WU was suspended. But then the computation was started over. That time it succeeded.

Can you fix this?

ID: 5259 · Rating: 0 · rate:

Reply Quote

rebirther
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 2 Jan 13
Posts: 7601
Credit: 44,264,218
RAC: 120
2M in Sierpinski / Riesel Base credit

5M in Sierpinski / Riesel Base - short credit

The error can produce bad results thats why the validator handled this as invalid.

ID: 5260 · Rating: 0 · rate:

Reply Quote

Ken_g6
Send message
Joined: 1 Jan 15
Posts: 3
Credit: 6,756,743
RAC: 42,001
10k in Sierpinski / Riesel Base credit

Alright, how about fixing it in the wrapper? If the number of SIGSEGV's in stderr.txt is greater than the number of RESTARTs, restart LLR (delete the z-file) and write "RESTARTing" lines until the number of SIGSEGV's in stderr.txt equals the number of RESTARTs. Edit: Or, more simply, just abort the WU when there's a SIGSEGV in stderr.txt.

Why are you using a different wrapper than PrimeGrid, anyway? (Doing the above would be a reason, but not a reason for not including a lot of features from said wrapper.)

ID: 5261 · Rating: 0 · rate:

Reply Quote

rebirther
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 2 Jan 13
Posts: 7601
Credit: 44,264,218
RAC: 120
2M in Sierpinski / Riesel Base credit

Alright, how about fixing it in the wrapper? If the number of SIGSEGV's in stderr.txt is greater than the number of RESTARTs, restart LLR (delete the z-file) and write "RESTARTing" lines until the number of SIGSEGV's in stderr.txt equals the number of RESTARTs. Edit: Or, more simply, just abort the WU when there's a SIGSEGV in stderr.txt.

Why are you using a different wrapper than PrimeGrid, anyway? (Doing the above would be a reason, but not a reason for not including a lot of features from said wrapper.)

Iam using an older wrapper from primegrid. The latest wrapper is hardcoded for primegrid.

ID: 5262 · Rating: 0 · rate:

Reply Quote

crashtech
Send message
Joined: 10 Apr 19
Posts: 29
Credit: 913,392,084
RAC: 2,232,294
1M in Sierpinski / Riesel Base credit

500k in Sierpinski / Riesel Base - short credit

10M in Sierpinski / Riesel Base - long credit

2M in Sierpinski / Riesel Base - average credit

If we have work in our queues, is there a quick way to determine which of them will produce these errors, so they can be aborted before being allowed to waste CPU cycles?

ID: 5264 · Rating: 0 · rate:

Reply Quote

rebirther
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 2 Jan 13
Posts: 7601
Credit: 44,264,218
RAC: 120
2M in Sierpinski / Riesel Base credit

If we have work in our queues, is there a quick way to determine which of them will produce these errors, so they can be aborted before being allowed to waste CPU cycles?

No.

ID: 5265 · Rating: 0 · rate:

Reply Quote

rebirther
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 2 Jan 13
Posts: 7601
Credit: 44,264,218
RAC: 120
2M in Sierpinski / Riesel Base credit

SIGSEGV: segmentation violation

ok, I have excluded this error for now in the validator (srbase2 app). Will check the results later.

ID: 5267 · Rating: 0 · rate:

Reply Quote

biodoc
Send message
Joined: 6 May 18
Posts: 1
Credit: 358,879,050
RAC: 4
100k in Riesel Base credit

500k in Sierpinski / Riesel Base - long credit

I have 42 tasks marked as invalid due to SIGSEGB: segmentation violation.

http://srbase.my-firewall.org/sr5/results.php?userid=1833&offset=0&show_names=0&state=5&appid=
I'm new to the project so I added the project on 4 computers and long 0.22 tasks were downloaded and started running in single thread mode. I added the proper app_config.xml file for running the app in mt mode and then restarted boinc for all 4 computers. Apparently tasks labeled as "waiting to run" were eventually processed and then were marked as invalid. I guess I should have aborted the tasks after restarting boinc and downloaded new ones.

ID: 5270 · Rating: 0 · rate:

Reply Quote

rebirther
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 2 Jan 13
Posts: 7601
Credit: 44,264,218
RAC: 120
2M in Sierpinski / Riesel Base credit

I have removed all segmentation violation from validator. All tasks should be now valid.

ID: 5271 · Rating: 0 · rate:

Reply Quote

crashtech
Send message
Joined: 10 Apr 19
Posts: 29
Credit: 913,392,084
RAC: 2,232,294
1M in Sierpinski / Riesel Base credit

@rebirther , thank you very much for your help!

ID: 5272 · Rating: 0 · rate:

Reply Quote