------- Comment #3 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-07 02:55 -------
(In reply to comment #2)
> I'm not sure we should do anything about this.
> We have a warning if the compiler can detect non-positive value at compile
> time,
> but we certainly can't ever issue any diagnostic at runtime for num_threads
> 0 (because the implementation uses that value to mean no num_threads clause
> was
> present) and I'm not convinced the runtime library needs to be verbose to
> stderr. So e.g. silently assuming just one thread is IMHO better than doing
> gomp_fatal in there. You shouldn't expect any particular behavior from
> program
> which triggers undefined behavior.
But in this case the value is negative, not zero, and it seems that gomp_fatal
is already being called:
libgomp: Out of memory allocating 34359738400 bytes
It will be better to print the cause of that "out of memory" error, that is,
that the number of threads was negative.
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |manu at gcc dot gnu dot org,
| |jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33720
