{"action":"closed","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/xianyi/OpenBLAS/issues/567","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/xianyi/OpenBLAS/issues/567/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/xianyi/OpenBLAS/issues/567/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/xianyi/OpenBLAS/issues/567/events","html_url":"https://github.com/xianyi/OpenBLAS/issues/567","id":75565438,"number":567,"title":"MAX_STACK_ALLOC + Segfault","user":{"login":"bashimao","id":7855770,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/7855770?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/bashimao","html_url":"https://github.com/bashimao","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bashimao/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bashimao/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bashimao/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bashimao/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bashimao/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bashimao/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bashimao/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bashimao/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bashimao/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"closed","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":10,"created_at":"2015-05-12T11:16:02Z","updated_at":"2015-05-13T14:57:55Z","closed_at":"2015-05-13T14:57:55Z","body":"Changing the default value of MAX_STACK_ALLOC may not have been a good idea. Even with the changes from (https://github.com/jeromerobert/OpenBLAS/commit/b17ccb4c5c5ef3a41b7a5040f1c604348f8cf6f0), I am still getting a Segfaults.\r\n\r\n<b>Example:</b>\r\nMultiplication of a 24 x 18 matrix with a 18 x 1 vector (filled with random doubles [0.0, 1.0]).\r\n\r\n<b>No problems with:</b>\r\n<code>\r\nmake BINARY=64 TARGET=NEHALEM USE_THREAD=0 MAX_STACK_ALLOC=0\r\n</code>\r\n<code>\r\nmake BINARY=64 TARGET=SANDYBRIDGE USE_THREAD=0 MAX_STACK_ALLOC=0\r\n</code>\r\n<code>\r\nmake BINARY=64 TARGET=HASWELL USE_THREAD=0 MAX_STACK_ALLOC=0\r\n</code>\r\n<code>\r\nmake BINARY=64 TARGET=NEHALEM USE_THREAD=0 MAX_STACK_ALLOC=2048\r\n</code>\r\n<code>\r\nmake BINARY=64 TARGET=SANDYBRIDGE USE_THREAD=0 MAX_STACK_ALLOC=2048\r\n</code>\r\n\r\n<b>Segfault with:</b>\r\n<code>\r\nmake BINARY=64 TARGET=HASWELL USE_THREAD=0 MAX_STACK_ALLOC=2048\r\n</code>\r\n\r\nPlease note that I am also getting segfaults, if I enforce the Sandybridge implementation together with MAX_STACK_ALLOC > 0. It just does not happen for this particular case.\r\n\r\n<b>System Detail:</b>\r\ncpu vendor_id : GenuineIntel\r\ncpu family : 6\r\nmodel : 60\r\nmodel name : Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4770 CPU @ 3.40GHz\r\nstepping : 3\r\nmicrocode : 0x16\r\nOS ... Linux ====> LinuxMint / Ubuntu, Trusty with kernel 3.16.0-36\r\nArchitecture ... x86_64\r\n\r\nBINARY ... 64bit\r\n\r\nC compiler ... GCC (command line : gcc) ====> gcc (Ubuntu 4.8.2-19ubuntu1) 4.8.2\r\nFortran compiler ... GFORTRAN (command line : gfortran) ===> GNU Fortran (Ubuntu 4.8.2-19ubuntu1) 4.8.2\r\n\r\n\r\n<bountysource-plugin>\r\n---\r\nWant to back this issue? **[Post a bounty on it!](https://www.bountysource.com/issues/14438646-max_stack_alloc-segfault?utm_campaign=plugin&utm_content=tracker%2F69691&utm_medium=issues&utm_source=github)** We accept bounties via [Bountysource](https://www.bountysource.com/?utm_campaign=plugin&utm_content=tracker%2F69691&utm_medium=issues&utm_source=github).\r\n</bountysource-plugin>"}}