On 11/11/2016 04:35 PM, Alexander Monakov wrote:
For the avoidance of doubt, is this a statement of intent, or an actual approval
for the patchset?
After these backend modifications and the rest of libgomp/middle-end changes are
applied, trunk will need the following flip-the-switch patch to al
On Fri, 11 Nov 2016, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 10/19/2016 12:39 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> > I'll refrain from any further comments on the topic. The ptx patches
> > don't look unreasonable iff someone else decides that this version of
> > OpenMP support should be merged and I'll look into them in
On 10/19/2016 12:39 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
I'll refrain from any further comments on the topic. The ptx patches
don't look unreasonable iff someone else decides that this version of
OpenMP support should be merged and I'll look into them in more detail
if that happens. Patch 2/8 is ok now.
So
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 07:58:49PM +0300, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Oct 2016, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> > The performance I saw was lower by a factor of 80 or so compared to their
> > CUDA
> > version, and even lower than OpenMP on the host.
>
> The currently published OpenMP version of
On 10/18/2016 06:58 PM, Alexander Monakov wrote:
The currently published OpenMP version of LULESH simply doesn't use openmp-simd
anywhere. This should make it obvious that it won't be anywhere near any
reasonable CUDA implementation, and also bound to be below host performance.
Besides, it's com
On Tue, 18 Oct 2016, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> [...] but then I think we shouldn't repeat the mistakes we made with OpenACC
I think it would be good if you'd mention for posterity what, specifically,
the mistakes were, in particular if you want those not to be repeated in the
context of OpenMP offloa
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 07:58:49PM +0300, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Oct 2016, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> > The performance I saw was lower by a factor of 80 or so compared to their
> > CUDA
> > version, and even lower than OpenMP on the host.
>
> The currently published OpenMP version of
On Tue, 18 Oct 2016, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> The performance I saw was lower by a factor of 80 or so compared to their CUDA
> version, and even lower than OpenMP on the host.
The currently published OpenMP version of LULESH simply doesn't use openmp-simd
anywhere. This should make it obvious that i
On 10/17/2016 07:06 PM, Alexander Monakov wrote:
I've just pushed two commits to the branch to fix this issue. Before those, the
last commit left the branch in a state where an incremental build seemed ok
(because libgcc/libgomp weren't rebuilt with the new cc1), but a from-scratch
build was br
On Mon, 17 Oct 2016, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 10/14/2016 06:39 PM, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> > I'm resending the patch series with backend prerequisites for OpenMP
> > offloading to the NVIDIA PTX ISA. The patches are rebased on trunk.
>
> What's the status of the branch? Is it expected to work
On 10/14/2016 06:39 PM, Alexander Monakov wrote:
I'm resending the patch series with backend prerequisites for OpenMP
offloading to the NVIDIA PTX ISA. The patches are rebased on trunk.
What's the status of the branch? Is it expected to work? I'm trying to
compile the OpenMP version of these
On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 07:53:52PM +0300, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> I'm sending updated patch series with backend prerequisites for OpenMP
> offloading to the NVIDIA PTX ISA. The first patch has already received some
> comments and this version reflects review feedback. The other patches have
>
12 matches
Mail list logo
