On Wed, 2 Dec 2015, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Just wanted to see -fdump-tree-ompexp dump say from the testcase I've
> posted. Does your patchset have any dependencies that aren't on the trunk?
> If not, I guess I just could apply the patchset and look at the results, but
> if there are, it would need
On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 04:54:39PM +0300, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Dec 2015, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > expand_omp is depth-first expansion, so for the case where the simd
> > region is in lexically (directly or indirectly) nested inside of a
> > target region, the above will not trigger.
On Wed, 2 Dec 2015, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> expand_omp is depth-first expansion, so for the case where the simd
> region is in lexically (directly or indirectly) nested inside of a
> target region, the above will not trigger. You'd need to
> use cgraph_node::get (current_function_decl)->offloadable
On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 06:28:27PM +0300, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> @@ -10218,12 +10218,37 @@ expand_omp_simd (struct omp_region *region, struct
> omp_for_data *fd)
>
>n1 = fd->loop.n1;
>n2 = fd->loop.n2;
> + step = fd->loop.step;
> + bool do_simt_transform
> += (cgraph_node::get
Apologies -- last-minute attempt to cleanup and enhance broke this patch;
fixed version below. The main difference is checking whether we're
transforming a loop that might be executed on the target: checking
decl->offloadable isn't enough, because target region outlining might not have
happened ye
