On 09/04/19 15:23 -0700, Thomas Rodgers wrote:
This also replaces calls to __TBB_ASSERT so that there are two macro
definitions provided by c++config -
__PSTL_ASSERT(_Condition)
__PSTL_ASSERT_MSG(_Condition, _Message)
* include/bits/c++config:
Add definition for __PSTL_ASSERT.
Add definition for __PSTL_ASSERT_MSG.
* include/pstl/algorithm_impl.h: Replace use of assert().
* include/pstl/numeric_impl.h: Replace use of assert().
* include/pstl/parallel_backend_tbb.h:
Replace use of assert().
Replace use of __TBB_ASSERT().
* include/pstl/parallel_backend_utils.h: Replace use of assert().
From d95934a0f325e0934ada829378c3c0dfd6b3628c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Thomas Rodgers <trodg...@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2019 15:27:35 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Replace direct PSTL uses of assert() with a macro
This also replaces calls to __TBB_ASSERT so that there are two macro
definitions provided by c++config -
__PSTL_ASSERT(_Condition)
__PSTL_ASSERT_MSG(_Condition, _Message)
* include/bits/c++config:
Add definition for __PSTL_ASSERT.
Add definition for __PSTL_ASSERT_MSG.
* include/pstl/algorithm_impl.h: Replace use of assert().
* include/pstl/numeric_impl.h: Replace use of assert().
* include/pstl/parallel_backend_tbb.h:
Replace use of assert().
Replace use of __TBB_ASSERT().
* include/pstl/parallel_backend_utils.h: Replace use of assert().
---
libstdc++-v3/include/bits/c++config | 4 ++++
libstdc++-v3/include/pstl/algorithm_impl.h | 14 +++++++-------
libstdc++-v3/include/pstl/numeric_impl.h | 8 ++++----
libstdc++-v3/include/pstl/parallel_backend_tbb.h | 11 ++++++-----
.../include/pstl/parallel_backend_utils.h | 15 +++++++--------
5 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/c++config
b/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/c++config
index 66420a9a3f2..8dd04f218b4 100644
--- a/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/c++config
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/c++config
@@ -690,6 +690,10 @@ namespace std
# undef __PSTL_PAR_BACKEND_TBB
# endif
+# define __PSTL_ASSERT(_Condition) (__glibcxx_assert(_Condition))
+# define __PSTL_ASSERT_MSG(_Condition, _Message) (__glibcxx_assert(_Condition))
I don't think these extra parens around the assert will work. When
_GLIBXCXX_ASSERTIONS is defined __glibcxx_assert expands to a do-while
statement, which isn't valid inside an (expression).
# define __PSTL_PRAGMA(x) _Pragma (#x)
# define __PSTL_STRING_AUX(x) #x
diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/include/pstl/algorithm_impl.h
b/libstdc++-v3/include/pstl/algorithm_impl.h
index e06bf60151e..a42d3993d1b 100644
--- a/libstdc++-v3/include/pstl/algorithm_impl.h
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/pstl/algorithm_impl.h
@@ -1309,7 +1309,7 @@ __pattern_unique_copy(_ExecutionPolicy&& __exec,
_RandomAccessIterator __first,
return __internal::__except_handler([&__exec, __n, __first, __result,
__pred, __is_vector, &__mask_buf]() {
bool* __mask = __mask_buf.get();
_DifferenceType __m{};
- __par_backend::parallel_strict_scan(
+ __par_backend::__parallel_strict_scan(
std::forward<_ExecutionPolicy>(__exec), __n,
_DifferenceType(0),
[=](_DifferenceType __i, _DifferenceType __len) ->
_DifferenceType { // Reduce
_DifferenceType __extra = 0;
@@ -2731,8 +2731,8 @@ __pattern_includes(_ExecutionPolicy&& __exec,
_ForwardIterator1 __first1, _Forwa
return !__internal::__parallel_or(
std::forward<_ExecutionPolicy>(__exec), __first2, __last2,
[__first1, __last1, __first2, __last2, &__comp](_ForwardIterator2
__i, _ForwardIterator2 __j) {
- assert(__j > __i);
- //assert(__j - __i > 1);
+ __PSTL_ASSERT(__j > __i);
+ //__PSTL_ASSERT(__j - __i > 1);
//1. moving boundaries to "consume" subsequence of equal
elements
auto __is_equal = [&__comp](_ForwardIterator2 __a,
_ForwardIterator2 __b) -> bool {
@@ -2756,8 +2756,8 @@ __pattern_includes(_ExecutionPolicy&& __exec,
_ForwardIterator1 __first1, _Forwa
//2. testing is __a subsequence of the second range included
into the first range
auto __b = std::lower_bound(__first1, __last1, *__i, __comp);
- assert(!__comp(*(__last1 - 1), *__b));
- assert(!__comp(*(__j - 1), *__i));
+ __PSTL_ASSERT(!__comp(*(__last1 - 1), *__b));
+ __PSTL_ASSERT(!__comp(*(__j - 1), *__i));
return !std::includes(__b, __last1, __i, __j, __comp);
});
});
@@ -2801,7 +2801,7 @@ __parallel_set_op(_ExecutionPolicy&& __exec,
_ForwardIterator1 __first1, _Forwar
__internal::__brick_move(__buffer + __s.__buf_pos, __buffer +
(__s.__buf_pos + __s.__len), __result + __s.__pos,
__is_vector);
};
- __par_backend::parallel_strict_scan(
+ __par_backend::__parallel_strict_scan(
This patch seems to include some additional fixes that aren't
mentioned in the changelog.
std::forward<_ExecutionPolicy>(__exec), __n1, _SetRange{0, 0, 0},
//-1, 0},
[=](_DifferenceType __i, _DifferenceType __len) {
// Reduce
//[__b; __e) - a subrange of the first sequence, to reduce
@@ -2948,7 +2948,7 @@ __parallel_set_union_op(_ExecutionPolicy&& __exec,
_ForwardIterator1 __first1, _
}
const auto __m2 = __left_bound_seq_2 - __first2;
- assert(__m1 == 0 || __m2 == 0);
+ __PSTL_ASSERT(__m1 == 0 || __m2 == 0);
if (__m2 > __set_algo_cut_off)
{
auto __res_or = __result;
diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/include/pstl/numeric_impl.h
b/libstdc++-v3/include/pstl/numeric_impl.h
index 49a4abf5a95..86f8ddf36a3 100644
--- a/libstdc++-v3/include/pstl/numeric_impl.h
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/pstl/numeric_impl.h
@@ -278,8 +278,8 @@ __pattern_transform_scan(_ExecutionPolicy&& __exec,
_RandomAccessIterator __firs
__par_backend::parallel_strict_scan(
std::forward<_ExecutionPolicy>(__exec), __n, __init,
[__first, __unary_op, __binary_op, __result,
__is_vector](_DifferenceType __i, _DifferenceType __len) {
- return __internal::__brick_transform_scan(__first + __i,
__first + (__i + __len), __result + __i, __unary_op, _Tp{},
- __binary_op, _Inclusive(),
__is_vector)
+ return __internal::__brick_transform_scan(__first + __i,
__first + (__i + __len), __result + __i,
+ __unary_op, _Tp{},
__binary_op, _Inclusive(), __is_vector)
Here too.
.second;
},
__binary_op,
@@ -314,7 +314,7 @@ _ForwardIterator2
__brick_adjacent_difference(_ForwardIterator1 __first, _ForwardIterator1
__last, _ForwardIterator2 __d_first,
BinaryOperation __op, /*is_vector=*/std::true_type)
noexcept
{
- assert(__first != __last);
+ __PSTL_ASSERT(__first != __last);
typedef typename std::iterator_traits<_ForwardIterator1>::reference
_ReferenceType1;
typedef typename std::iterator_traits<_ForwardIterator2>::reference
_ReferenceType2;
@@ -344,7 +344,7 @@ __pattern_adjacent_difference(_ExecutionPolicy&& __exec,
_ForwardIterator1 __fir
_ForwardIterator2 __d_first, _BinaryOperation
__op, _IsVector __is_vector,
/*is_parallel=*/std::true_type)
{
- assert(__first != __last);
+ __PSTL_ASSERT(__first != __last);
typedef typename std::iterator_traits<_ForwardIterator1>::reference
_ReferenceType1;
typedef typename std::iterator_traits<_ForwardIterator2>::reference
_ReferenceType2;
diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/include/pstl/parallel_backend_tbb.h
b/libstdc++-v3/include/pstl/parallel_backend_tbb.h
index f09f47a8a89..8195684048b 100644
--- a/libstdc++-v3/include/pstl/parallel_backend_tbb.h
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/pstl/parallel_backend_tbb.h
@@ -139,7 +139,7 @@ struct __par_trans_red_body
_Tp&
sum()
{
- __TBB_ASSERT(_M_has_sum, "sum expected");
+ __PSTL_ASSERT_MSG(_M_has_sum, "sum expected");
return *(_Tp*)_M_sum_storage;
}
__par_trans_red_body(_Up __u, _Tp __init, _Cp __c, _Rp __r)
@@ -173,7 +173,7 @@ struct __par_trans_red_body
_Index __j = __range.end();
if (!_M_has_sum)
{
- __TBB_ASSERT(__range.size() > 1, "there should be at least 2
elements");
+ __PSTL_ASSERT_MSG(__range.size() > 1, "there should be at least 2
elements");
new (&_M_sum_storage)
_Tp(_M_combine(_M_u(__i), _M_u(__i + 1))); // The condition i+1
< j is provided by the grain size of 3
_M_has_sum = true;
@@ -233,7 +233,7 @@ class __trans_scan_body
_Tp&
sum() const
{
- __TBB_ASSERT(_M_has_sum, "sum expected");
+ __PSTL_ASSERT_MSG(_M_has_sum, "sum expected");
return *const_cast<_Tp*>(reinterpret_cast<_Tp const*>(_M_sum_storage));
}
@@ -347,7 +347,8 @@ __downsweep(_Index __i, _Index __m, _Index __tilesize, _Tp*
__r, _Index __lastsi
// T must have a trivial constructor and destructor.
template <class _ExecutionPolicy, typename _Index, typename _Tp, typename _Rp,
typename _Cp, typename _Sp, typename _Ap>
void
-parallel_strict_scan(_ExecutionPolicy&&, _Index __n, _Tp __initial, _Rp
__reduce, _Cp __combine, _Sp __scan, _Ap __apex)
+__parallel_strict_scan(_ExecutionPolicy&&, _Index __n, _Tp __initial, _Rp
__reduce, _Cp __combine, _Sp __scan,
+ _Ap __apex)
And here.
The assert parts look fine, and this uglification looks fine, but they
should be in separate patches please.
