Re: [PATCH] Remove PTX link option

2016-02-07 Thread Thomas Schwinge
Hi Alexander! On Fri, 29 Jan 2016 18:12:06 +0300, Alexander Monakov wrote: > On Mon, 11 Jan 2016, Alexander Monakov wrote: > > > On Mon, 11 Jan 2016, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > > Alexander, would you please also submit a fix for that for nvptx-tools' > > > nvptx-run.c? (Or want me to do that?)

Re: [PATCH] Remove PTX link option

2016-01-29 Thread Alexander Monakov
On Mon, 11 Jan 2016, Alexander Monakov wrote: > On Mon, 11 Jan 2016, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > Alexander, would you please also submit a fix for that for nvptx-tools' > > nvptx-run.c? (Or want me to do that?) > > I can do that, along with another small change I used for -mgomp testing. I have

Re: [PATCH] Remove PTX link option

2016-01-11 Thread Alexander Monakov
On Mon, 11 Jan 2016, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > This patch is ok for trunk with proper attribution in the ChangeLog. I went ahead and applied the patch myself. Thanks. Alexander

Re: [PATCH] Remove PTX link option

2016-01-11 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:38:29AM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > On Mon, 11 Jan 2016 12:46:17 +0300 (MSK), Alexander Monakov > wrote: > > On Fri, 8 Jan 2016, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > > And CU_JIT_TARGET / CU_TARGET_COMPUTE_30 requests JITting only on sm_30 > > > and > > > nothing else, or just

Re: [PATCH] Remove PTX link option

2016-01-11 Thread Alexander Monakov
On Mon, 11 Jan 2016, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > Alexander, would you please also submit a fix for that for nvptx-tools' > nvptx-run.c? (Or want me to do that?) I can do that, along with another small change I used for -mgomp testing. > Going further, for both GCC's libgomp and nvptx-tools' nvptx-r

Re: [PATCH] Remove PTX link option

2016-01-11 Thread Thomas Schwinge
Hi! On Mon, 11 Jan 2016 12:46:17 +0300 (MSK), Alexander Monakov wrote: > On Fri, 8 Jan 2016, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > And CU_JIT_TARGET / CU_TARGET_COMPUTE_30 requests JITting only on sm_30 and > > nothing else, or just on sm_30 or later, something else? > > It requests to produce binary code t

Re: [PATCH] Remove PTX link option

2016-01-11 Thread Alexander Monakov
On Fri, 8 Jan 2016, James Norris wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 10:21:16AM -0600, James Norris wrote: > > So, why this didn't get fixed 1.5 years ago? Are you testing just on sm_30 > > and not on sm_50? > > > > Jakub > > As the Maxwell GPU's (sm_50) are relatively new, we've only > recently

Re: [PATCH] Remove PTX link option

2016-01-11 Thread Alexander Monakov
On Fri, 8 Jan 2016, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > And CU_JIT_TARGET / CU_TARGET_COMPUTE_30 requests JITting only on sm_30 and > nothing else, or just on sm_30 or later, something else? It requests to produce binary code targeting sm_30 devices. Newer (Maxwell) devices use a different hw instruction set,

Re: [PATCH] Remove PTX link option

2016-01-08 Thread James Norris
On 01/08/2016 10:32 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 10:21:16AM -0600, James Norris wrote: And CU_JIT_TARGET / CU_TARGET_COMPUTE_30 requests JITting only on sm_30 and nothing else, or just on sm_30 or later, something else? This really should be reviewed by somebody familiar with

Re: [PATCH] Remove PTX link option

2016-01-08 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 10:21:16AM -0600, James Norris wrote: > >And CU_JIT_TARGET / CU_TARGET_COMPUTE_30 requests JITting only on sm_30 and > >nothing else, or just on sm_30 or later, something else? > >This really should be reviewed by somebody familiar with CUDA more than > >myself. > > > > The

Re: [PATCH] Remove PTX link option

2016-01-08 Thread Bernd Schmidt
On 01/08/2016 04:44 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: And CU_JIT_TARGET / CU_TARGET_COMPUTE_30 requests JITting only on sm_30 and nothing else, or just on sm_30 or later, something else? This really should be reviewed by somebody familiar with CUDA more than myself. I'll defer to Nathan whether to ack t

Re: [PATCH] Remove PTX link option

2016-01-08 Thread James Norris
Jakub, On 01/08/2016 09:44 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 09:39:11AM -0600, James Norris wrote: On 01/08/2016 09:30 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 09:24:14AM -0600, James Norris wrote: This patch removes the constraint whereby the PTX emitted was only for s

Re: [PATCH] Remove PTX link option

2016-01-08 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 09:39:11AM -0600, James Norris wrote: > On 01/08/2016 09:30 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > >On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 09:24:14AM -0600, James Norris wrote: > >>This patch removes the constraint whereby the PTX > >>emitted was only for sm_30 GPU's. With this removal, > >>the PTX em

Re: [PATCH] Remove PTX link option

2016-01-08 Thread James Norris
Jakub, On 01/08/2016 09:30 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 09:24:14AM -0600, James Norris wrote: This patch removes the constraint whereby the PTX emitted was only for sm_30 GPU's. With this removal, the PTX emitted will be targeted for the current context, i.e., attached GPU.

Re: [PATCH] Remove PTX link option

2016-01-08 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 09:24:14AM -0600, James Norris wrote: > This patch removes the constraint whereby the PTX > emitted was only for sm_30 GPU's. With this removal, > the PTX emitted will be targeted for the current > context, i.e., attached GPU. > > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok

[PATCH] Remove PTX link option

2016-01-08 Thread James Norris
Hi, This patch removes the constraint whereby the PTX emitted was only for sm_30 GPU's. With this removal, the PTX emitted will be targeted for the current context, i.e., attached GPU. Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk? Thanks, Jim diff --git a/libgomp/plugin/plugin-nvptx.c b