{numlib}[intel/2021b] SuiteSparse v5.8.1, PETSc v3.18.4, SLEPc v3.18.2 w/ Python 3.9.6

[ItIsI-Orient]

(created using eb --new-pr)

[branfosj]

Test report by @branfosj
SUCCESS
Build succeeded for 6 out of 6 (3 easyconfigs in total)
bear-pg0105u03a.bear.cluster - Linux RHEL 8.6, x86_64, Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8360Y CPU @ 2.40GHz (icelake), Python 3.6.8
See https://gist.github.com/branfosj/e1e5cd834e70d36b5e19f616a810ec24 for a full test report.

[branfosj]

@boegelbot please test @ generoso
CORE_CNT=16

[boegelbot]

@branfosj: Request for testing this PR well received on login1

PR test command 'EB_PR=17625 EB_ARGS= EB_CONTAINER= /opt/software/slurm/bin/sbatch --job-name test_PR_17625 --ntasks="16" ~/boegelbot/eb_from_pr_upload_generoso.sh' executed!

• exit code: 0
• output:

Submitted batch job 10598

Test results coming soon (I hope)...

- notification for comment with ID 1497442177 processed

Message to humans: this is just bookkeeping information for me,
it is of no use to you (unless you think I have a bug, which I don't).

[boegelbot]

Test report by @boegelbot
SUCCESS
Build succeeded for 3 out of 3 (3 easyconfigs in total)
cnx1 - Linux Rocky Linux 8.5, x86_64, Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2690 v3 @ 2.60GHz (haswell), Python 3.6.8
See https://gist.github.com/boegelbot/5386607bbda664cbca12526f59672416 for a full test report.

[branfosj]

Going in, thanks @ItIsI-Orient!

[boegel]

That's... interesting.

Should we consider doing this always, via the custom easyblock we have for SuiteSparse?
There's no impact on the binaries being built by disabling the optimization report, I think?

[branfosj]

I've asked the question (DrTimothyAldenDavis/GraphBLAS#211) to better understand if there are implications. Ideally it'd be changed upstream, meaning we'd not need this.