Hi!
On Mon, 3 Aug 2015 10:30:49 -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> I've committed this patch to gomp4. The existing implementation of
> firstprivate
> presumes the existence of memory at the CTA level. This patch does away with
> that, treating firstprivate as thread-private variables initialize
On 08/18/15 17:43, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
..., but the following ones remain to be addressed -- could somebody look
into this, please? Especially the timeouts are very annoying. Tests
that now reproducibly XPASS instead of XFAIL should be verified, and the
XFAIL marker removed.
[-PASS:-
Hi!
On Mon, 10 Aug 2015 21:50:21 +0200, I wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Aug 2015 10:30:49 -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> > I've committed this patch to gomp4. The existing implementation of
> > firstprivate
> > presumes the existence of memory at the CTA level. This patch does away
> > with
> > that,
Hi!
On Mon, 3 Aug 2015 10:30:49 -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> I've committed this patch to gomp4. The existing implementation of
> firstprivate
> presumes the existence of memory at the CTA level. This patch does away with
> that, treating firstprivate as thread-private variables initialize
