On 04/08/2014 16:23, Roman Gareev wrote:
I would expect the to mark the i loop as non-parallel, but the j-loop
as parallel. What is the partial schedule, the set of dependences and
the dimension you check for both the i and the j loop?
Yes, you are right. The i loop is non-parallel and j-loop i
Sorry for misprint. It passes all the tests from
libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.graphite
> The attached patch contains the improved version of checking for the
> loop parallelism, which passes all the tests from
> libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.graphite except
> graphite-isl-ast-to-gimple.c.
--
> I would expect the to mark the i loop as non-parallel, but the j-loop
> as parallel. What is the partial schedule, the set of dependences and
> the dimension you check for both the i and the j loop?
Yes, you are right. The i loop is non-parallel and j-loop is parallel.
I've found that this subst
On 04/08/2014 08:09, Roman Gareev wrote:
Those waw dependences seem to be correct. Should even the previous analysis
only mark the j-loop as parallel?
The previous and the current analysis mark the j-loop as
nonparallelizable. (Possibly, I don't fully understand the question.
Could you please r
> Those waw dependences seem to be correct. Should even the previous analysis
> only mark the j-loop as parallel?
The previous and the current analysis mark the j-loop as
nonparallelizable. (Possibly, I don't fully understand the question.
Could you please reformulate it?)
--
On 03/08/2014 16:05, Roman Gareev wrote:
This looks very similar to what we reported to the isl mailing list. It is
definitely not the best test case for the parallelism patch. In fact, I
doubt this requires the parallelism test at all.
I've found out, that Graphite generates the expected code
Sorry for misprints
> Graphite successfully passes all the tests from
> libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.graphite except graphite-isl-ast-to-gimple.c
> and graphite-poly.h
except force-parallel-5.c and force-parallel-8.c
--
Cheers, Roman Gareev.
> This looks very similar to what we reported to the isl mailing list. It is
> definitely not the best test case for the parallelism patch. In fact, I
> doubt this requires the parallelism test at all.
I've found out, that Graphite generates the expected code using the
separate option for all dime
On 02/08/2014 11:49, Roman Gareev wrote:
Hi Roman,
>
>you can get this information from the isl_ast_build that was used when
>generating a certain loop (you can access this isl_ast_build from the
>callbacks isl_ast_build_set_before_each_for and
>isl_ast_build_set_after_each_for). With isl_ast_bui
> Hi Roman,
>
> you can get this information from the isl_ast_build that was used when
> generating a certain loop (you can access this isl_ast_build from the
> callbacks isl_ast_build_set_before_each_for and
> isl_ast_build_set_after_each_for). With isl_ast_build_get_schedule, you can
> get an inc
10 matches
Mail list logo
