On Wed, 10 May 2017 17:24:27 +0200
Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> What I don't like is that the patch is inconsistent, it sets DECL_CONTEXT
> of the child function for all kinds of outlined functions, but then you just
> choose one of the many places and add it into the BLOCK tree. Any reason
> why the
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 5:24 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, May 05, 2017 at 10:23:59AM -0700, Kevin Buettner wrote:
>> On Fri, 5 May 2017 14:23:14 +0300 (MSK)
>> Alexander Monakov wrote:
>>
>> > On Thu, 4 May 2017, Kevin Buettner wrote:
>> > > diff --git a/gcc/omp-expand.c b/gcc/omp-expand.c
On Fri, May 05, 2017 at 10:23:59AM -0700, Kevin Buettner wrote:
> On Fri, 5 May 2017 14:23:14 +0300 (MSK)
> Alexander Monakov wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 4 May 2017, Kevin Buettner wrote:
> > > diff --git a/gcc/omp-expand.c b/gcc/omp-expand.c
> > > index 5c48b78..7029951 100644
> > > --- a/gcc/omp-expan
On Fri, 5 May 2017 14:23:14 +0300 (MSK)
Alexander Monakov wrote:
> On Thu, 4 May 2017, Kevin Buettner wrote:
> > diff --git a/gcc/omp-expand.c b/gcc/omp-expand.c
> > index 5c48b78..7029951 100644
> > --- a/gcc/omp-expand.c
> > +++ b/gcc/omp-expand.c
> > @@ -667,6 +667,25 @@ expand_parallel_call (
On Thu, 4 May 2017, Kevin Buettner wrote:
> diff --git a/gcc/omp-expand.c b/gcc/omp-expand.c
> index 5c48b78..7029951 100644
> --- a/gcc/omp-expand.c
> +++ b/gcc/omp-expand.c
> @@ -667,6 +667,25 @@ expand_parallel_call (struct omp_region *region,
> basic_block bb,
Outlined functions are also used
Ahem... I forgot to note that:
I have bootstrapped and regression tested my patch on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
Kevin
On Thu, 4 May 2017 17:45:51 -0700
Kevin Buettner wrote:
> Consider the following OpenMP program:
>
> void foo (int a1) {}
>
> int
> main (void)
> {
> static
