Re: [gomp4] Un-parallelized OpenACC kernels constructs with nvptx offloading: "avoid offloading"

Hi Jakub! On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 22:54:26 +0100, I wrote: > On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 18:26:49 +0100, Tom de Vries > wrote: > > [...] [OpenACC] kernels region [...] > > that parloops does not manage to parallelize: > Telling from real-world code that we've been having a look at, when the > above situati

Re: [gomp4] Un-parallelized OpenACC kernels constructs with nvptx offloading: "avoid offloading"

Hi Jakub! On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 09:36:25 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 08:40:26AM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 22:54:26 +0100, I wrote: > > > On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 18:26:49 +0100, Tom de Vries > > > wrote: > > &

[gomp4] Merge trunk r232548 (2016-01-19) into gomp-4_0-branch

Hi! Committed to gomp-4_0-branch in r232784: commit 9cfa5d5eb5fd3b186124883a76232189b359b3de Merge: 312e74d 56778b6 Author: tschwinge Date: Mon Jan 25 07:35:18 2016 + svn merge -r 232189:232548 svn+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk git-svn-id: svn+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc

(Non-)offloading diagnostics (was: [hsa 0/10] Merge of HSA branch)

Hi! On Thu, 10 Dec 2015 18:51:48 +0100, Martin Jambor wrote: > On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 12:46:45PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 12:17:58PM +0100, Martin Jambor wrote: > > > [...] There are no failing > > > testcases if HSA is not configured. If it is, there are some, a

Re: (Non-)offloading diagnostics

Hi! On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 14:18:31 +0300 (MSK), Alexander Monakov wrote: > On Tue, 26 Jan 2016, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > A very similar problem also exists for nvptx offloading (Nathan CCed), > > where we emit similar warnings (enabled by default). As nvptx offloading > >

Partial Offloading (was: [hsa merge 07/10] IPA-HSA pass)

Hi! > [...] I made an attempt to capture the recent discussion (plus my own ideas/understanding) in this new section: . Please change/extend, as required. Grüße Thomas signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[gomp4] Merge trunk r232931 (2016-01-28) into gomp-4_0-branch

Hi! Committed to gomp-4_0-branch in r232967: commit 5999e6842d3f9cecc5cb500ebf692f54158e8017 Merge: 9cfa5d5 b547a9b Author: tschwinge Date: Fri Jan 29 06:46:35 2016 + svn merge -r 232548:232931 svn+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk git-svn-id: svn+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc

Re: [hsa merge 01/10] Configury changes and new options

109d976bc098e197f220d1b9 Author: tschwinge Date: Tue Feb 2 12:48:04 2016 + libgomp: Don't configure for offloading target if we don't build the corresponding plugin libgomp/ * plugin/configfrag.ac: Don't configure for offloading target if we d

Re: [OpenACC 0/7] host_data construct

10 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-) diff --git gcc/ChangeLog gcc/ChangeLog index 05741331..9a2cec8 100644 --- gcc/ChangeLog +++ gcc/ChangeLog @@ -1,3 +1,9 @@ +2016-02-02 Thomas Schwinge + + * omp-builtins.def (BUILT_IN_GOACC_HOST_DATA): Remove. + * omp-low.c (expand_omp_target): Use

Un-parallelized OpenACC kernels constructs with nvptx offloading: "avoid offloading"

d code (and the "avoid offloading" handling will no longer trigger). OK to commit? commit acd66946777671486a0f69706b25a3ec5f877306 Author: Thomas Schwinge Date: Tue Feb 2 20:41:42 2016 +0100 Un-parallelized OpenACC kernels constructs with nvptx offloading: "avoid offloading"

Use plain -fopenacc to enable OpenACC kernels processing (was: [PATCH, 6/16] Add pass_oacc_kernels)

Hi! On Mon, 9 Nov 2015 18:39:19 +0100, Tom de Vries wrote: > On 09/11/15 16:35, Tom de Vries wrote: > > this patch series for stage1 trunk adds support to: > > - parallelize oacc kernels regions using parloops, and > > - map the loops onto the oacc gang dimension. > Atm, the parallelization beha

Re: [PATCH] Remove PTX link option

Hi Alexander! On Fri, 29 Jan 2016 18:12:06 +0300, Alexander Monakov wrote: > On Mon, 11 Jan 2016, Alexander Monakov wrote: > > > On Mon, 11 Jan 2016, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > > Alexander, would you please also submit a fix for that for nvptx-tools' > > > n

Re: Un-parallelized OpenACC kernels constructs with nvptx offloading: "avoid offloading"

ill be doing, and we'll notice how the OpenACC kernels > handling improves, when parloops gets able to parallelize more offloaded > code (and the "avoid offloading" handling will no longer trigger). OK to > commit? > > commit acd66946777671486a0f69706b25a3ec5f877306 &g

Re: Un-parallelized OpenACC kernels constructs with nvptx offloading: "avoid offloading"

Hi! On Wed, 10 Feb 2016 14:25:50 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 02/10/2016 12:49 PM, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > [...] > > I think this has to be considered after gcc-6. Hmm, I see. > In general, what's the > state of OpenACC these days? Much improved compar

Re: Use plain -fopenacc to enable OpenACC kernels processing

Hi! Will this patch be acceptable for GCC trunk in the current development stage? In its current incarnation, this patch depends on my 'Un-parallelized OpenACC kernels constructs with nvptx offloading: "avoid offloading"' patch,

Re: Un-parallelized OpenACC kernels constructs with nvptx offloading: "avoid offloading"

Hi! On Wed, 10 Feb 2016 16:27:40 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 02/10/2016 03:39 PM, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > > Yes, we need a hammer that big: we have to ensure consistency between > > data regions on the device and code offloading to the device, as > > otherwise we

Re: Un-parallelized OpenACC kernels constructs with nvptx offloading: "avoid offloading"

Hi! On Wed, 10 Feb 2016 17:37:30 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 02/10/2016 05:23 PM, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > Why? A user of GCC has no intrinsic interest in getting OpenACC kernels > > constructs' code offloaded; the user wants his code to execute as fast as > >

Re: Un-parallelized OpenACC kernels constructs with nvptx offloading: "avoid offloading"

Hi! There are two issues here: 1. "avoid offloading" mechanism, and 2. "avoid offloading" policy. On Wed, 10 Feb 2016 21:07:29 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 02/10/2016 06:37 PM, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > On Wed, 10 Feb 2016 17:37:30 +0100, Bernd Schmidt &

Re: [PATCH 4/n] OpenMP 4.0 offloading infrastructure: lto-wrapper

Hi! On Thu, 2 Oct 2014 19:14:57 +0400, Ilya Verbin wrote: > With this patch lto-wrapper performs invocation of mkoffload tool for each > offload target. This tool [...] > will compile IR from .gnu.offload_lto_* sections into offload > target code and embed the resultant code (offload image) into

Re: [PATCH][RFC][Offloading] Fix PR68463

Hi! On Sat, 20 Feb 2016 13:54:20 +0300, Ilya Verbin wrote: > On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 15:53:08 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 08:19:34PM +0300, Ilya Verbin wrote: > > > This patch adds crtoffload{begin,end}.o to all -fopenmp programs, if they > > > exist. > > > I couldn't

Re: Use plain -fopenacc to enable OpenACC kernels processing

Hi! On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 17:53:58 +0100, Tom de Vries wrote: > On 10/02/16 15:40, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > On Fri, 5 Feb 2016 13:06:17 +0100, I wrote: > >> On Mon, 9 Nov 2015 18:39:19 +0100, Tom de Vries > >> wrote: > >>> On 09/11/15 16:35, Tom de Vr

Re: [PATCH][RFC][Offloading] Fix PR68463

Hi! On Tue, 23 Feb 2016 08:37:07 +0100, Tom de Vries wrote: > On 22/02/16 19:07, Ilya Verbin wrote: > > 2016-02-22 18:13 GMT+03:00 Thomas Schwinge: > >> >On Sat, 20 Feb 2016 13:54:20 +0300, Ilya Verbin wrote: > >>> >>On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 15:53:08 +0100,

Re: [PATCH] hurd: align -p and -pg behavior on Linux

Hi! Sorry for the late answer... On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 14:00:23 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: > On Linux, -p and -pg do not make gcc link against libc_p.a, only > -profile does (as documented in r11246), and thus people expect -p (Yo, 20 years ago...) > and -pg to work without libc_p.a installe

Re: [PATCH] libffi testsuite: Use split to ensure valid tcl list

Hi! Already had noticed something odd here months ago; now finally looked into it... On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 13:59:30 -0400, John David Anglin wrote: > The attached change fixes tcl errors that occur running the complex.exp and > go.exp test sets. > See:

Re: [PATCH] libffi testsuite: Use split to ensure valid tcl list

Hi! On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 11:45:06 -0800, Mike Stump wrote: > On Feb 25, 2016, at 11:10 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > +set lines [libffi_target_compile $src /dev/null assembly “"] > > Does this work on a dos box, or windows or other random non-posix systems? I don'

Re: (Non-)offloading diagnostics

Hi! In light of the -Whsa testsuite patches just posted, I think we first need to clarify the general policy questions I posted a month ago: On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 11:46:14 +0100, I wrote: > On Thu, 10 Dec 2015 18:51:48 +0100, Martin Jambor wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 12:46:45PM +0100, Jakub

RE: Initial submission of OpenACC support integrated into OpenMP's lowering and expansion passes

Hi! I'm sorry for the very late answer! On Thu, 7 Nov 2013 22:10:15 +0400, Evgeny Gavrin wrote: > I've looked at your changes and in most of front-end parts it looks > reasonable to me. As you know, we're like-minded with you about how OpenACC's > front-ends should look like. So, I think it's

RE: Initial submission of OpenACC support integrated into OpenMP's lowering and expansion passes

Hi! Again, I'm sorry for the late answer. On Fri, 8 Nov 2013 13:55:24 +0400, Dmitry Bocharnikov wrote: > > > This is in contrast to Samsung's work, who are implementing OpenACC > > > separately from the existing OpenMP support. > > I'm not fully agree that this in contrast to things are taking

[gomp4] Restore GIMPLE_OACC_PARALLEL functionality (was: r205231 - in /branches/gomp-4_0-branch: ./ Chan...)

Hi! On Thu, 21 Nov 2013 20:20:45 -, ja...@gcc.gnu.org wrote: > Author: jakub > Date: Thu Nov 21 20:20:44 2013 > New Revision: 205231 > > URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=205231&root=gcc&view=rev > Log: > svn merge -r204964:205223 svn+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk Jakub, many thanks for

Re: PING: Fwd: Re: [patch] implement Cilk Plus simd loops on trunk

testcase is basically a concatenation of gcc.dg/cilk-plus/jump.c and gcc.dg/gomp/block-1.c -- should this be done differently/better? commit eee16f8aad4527b705d327476b00bf9f5ba6dcce Author: Thomas Schwinge Date: Fri Dec 6 18:55:41 2013 +0100 Fix possible ICE (null pointer dereference) int

[gomp4] OpenACC structured blocks (was: PING: Fwd: Re: [patch] implement Cilk Plus simd loops on trunk)

{ > > + if (cilkplus_block) > > + error ("invalid entry to Cilk Plus structured block"); > > + else > > + error ("invalid entry to OpenMP structured block"); > > +} > > else > > -/* Otherwise, be vague and lazy, bu

GOMP_target: alignment (was: [gomp4] #pragma omp target* fixes)

Hi! On Thu, 5 Sep 2013 18:11:05 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > 3) I figured out we need to tell the runtime library not just > address, size and kind, but also alignment (we won't need that for > the #pragma omp declare target global vars though), so that the > runtime library can properly align i

Re: GOMP_target: alignment (was: [gomp4] #pragma omp target* fixes)

Hi! On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 11:02:30 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 10:53:02AM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > On Thu, 5 Sep 2013 18:11:05 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > > 3) I figured out we need to tell the runtime library not just > > > addre

Cleanup patches, mostly in the realm of OpenMP

Hi! OK to apply the following cleanup patches to trunk, assuming that testing (still running) is fine? commit 68c9deec084dff1e5d8caf6a17ec3eec1f8f9f33 Author: Thomas Schwinge Date: Wed Oct 23 19:40:10 2013 +0200 Fix description of OpenMP parallel directive in the C and C++ front ends

maybe_fold_stmt (was: [gomp4] #pragma omp target* fixes)

> + source. Call fold_stmt now. */ > + if (target_nesting_level) > +for (gsi = gsi_start (*body); !gsi_end_p (gsi); gsi_next (&gsi)) > + fold_stmt (&gsi); >input_location = saved_location; > } OK to commit to trunk the following patch? commit 6ff10eb51ea39a25e53e0369626559be208bb16

Re: lto-plugin: mismatch between ld's architecture and GCC's configure --host

; > > * Makefile.def (host_modules): Add libiberty-linker-plugin. > > > (host_modules) : Pay attention to > > > @extra_linker_plugin_flags@ and > > > @extra_linker_plugin_configure_flags@. > > > (all-lto-plugin): Also

Re: GOMP_target: alignment (was: [gomp4] #pragma omp target* fixes)

ge would easily be possible now, with the OpenMP 4 support merged > into trunk -- though, it is not yet part of a regular GCC release? Here is the patch I propose for gomp-4_0-branch; OK? commit ea56cdbd257b08421fefc8e30fd4a28d37d6e481 Author: Thomas Schwinge Date: Sun Dec 15 11:03:47 2013 +0

Re: GOMP_target: alignment (was: [gomp4] #pragma omp target* fixes)

Hi! On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 16:38:18 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 08:41:02AM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > Here is the patch I propose for gomp-4_0-branch; OK? > > No. The reason for 3 separate arrays is that some of the values > are always variable,

Generalizing existing OpenMP infrastructure (was: Cleanup patches, mostly in the realm of OpenMP)

Hi! On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 09:58:07 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 11:12:03AM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > --- gcc/gimplify.c > > +++ gcc/gimplify.c > > @@ -129,6 +129,8 @@ struct gimplify_ctx > >bool in_cleanup_point_expr; > > };

Re: Cleanup patches, mostly in the realm of OpenMP

Hi! On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 09:58:07 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 11:12:03AM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > OK to apply the following cleanup patches to trunk, assuming that testing > > (still running) is fine? Thanks for the review! > > Refle

Re: [PING]: [GOMP4] [PATCH] SIMD-Enabled Functions (formerly Elemental functions) for C

Hi! For reference, here's my rationale for OpenACC on this topic: On Tue, 17 Dec 2013 07:17:31 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 03:51:14AM +, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: > > Hi Jakub, > > I will work on this, but I need a couple clarifications about some of > > your co

Re: [PING]: [GOMP4] [PATCH] SIMD-Enabled Functions (formerly Elemental functions) for C

Hi! On Tue, 17 Dec 2013 11:27:51 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:03:12AM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > My understanding/reasoning is that PRAGMA_OMP_* just literally represents > > a parser token of a pragma line (see the one-to-one trans

Re: GOMP_target: alignment (was: [gomp4] #pragma omp target* fixes)

ignment; }« would be more difficult, for unclear benefit, so I didn't look into that. commit 46002ec0e69e2fbc1f14d2549a5cbb93849c1da1 Author: Thomas Schwinge Date: Tue Dec 17 13:44:46 2013 +0100 Prepare OpenACC memory mapping interface for additional mapping kinds. gc

Re: GOMP_target: alignment (was: [gomp4] #pragma omp target* fixes)

Hi! This one's owed to me still learning about GCC internals; if someone could please be so kind to poit me to the appropriate documentation, or explain: On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 16:38:18 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > The reason for 3 separate arrays is that some of the values > are always variable,

Re: GOMP_target: alignment (was: [gomp4] #pragma omp target* fixes)

Hi! On Wed, 18 Dec 2013 22:46:48 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 09:03:40PM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 16:38:18 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > > The reason for 3 separate arrays is that some of the values > > > ar

Re: maybe_fold_stmt (was: [gomp4] #pragma omp target* fixes)

>for (gsi = gsi_start (*body); !gsi_end_p (gsi); gsi_next (&gsi)) > > lower_omp_1 (&gsi, ctx); > > + /* Inside target region we haven't called fold_stmt during > > gimplification, > > + because it can break code by adding decl references that

Re: [gomp4] OpenACC structured blocks (was: PING: Fwd: Re: [patch] implement Cilk Plus simd loops on trunk)

run into a > > SIGSEGV/ICE because of label_ctx == NULL. The fix is simple enough; OK > > for trunk and gomp-4_0-branch (after full testing)? > > Testing looks good. > > > The testcase is > > basically a concatenation of gcc.dg/cilk-plus/jump.c and >

Question about gimplify.c:gimplify_adjust_omp_clauses_1, GOVD_MAP_TO_ONLY

Hi! In gimplify.c:gimplify_adjust_omp_clauses_1, does the case for GOVD_MAP_TO_ONLY have a real current use case (I couldn't spot any), or is it "just for completeness"? diff --git gcc/gimplify.c gcc/gimplify.c index 3738589..870550c 100644 --- gcc/gimplify.c +++ gcc/gimplify.c @@ -6136,9 +6136,9

Re: Question about gimplify.c:gimplify_adjust_omp_clauses_1, GOVD_MAP_TO_ONLY

Hi! On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 21:43:35 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 09:38:25PM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > In gimplify.c:gimplify_adjust_omp_clauses_1, does the case for > > GOVD_MAP_TO_ONLY have a real current use case (I couldn't spot any), or

Re: Question about gimplify.c:gimplify_adjust_omp_clauses_1, GOVD_MAP_TO_ONLY

Hi! On Thu, 09 Jan 2014 23:21:26 +0100, I wrote: > On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 21:43:35 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 09:38:25PM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > > In gimplify.c:gimplify_adjust_omp_clauses_1, does the case for > > > GOVD_MAP_TO_ONLY h

Re: [gomp4] OpenACC structured blocks (was: PING: Fwd: Re: [patch] implement Cilk Plus simd loops on trunk)

th -fcilkplus and -fopenmp are specified, that will run into a > > > SIGSEGV/ICE because of label_ctx == NULL. The fix is simple enough; OK > > > for trunk and gomp-4_0-branch (after full testing)? > > > > Testing looks good. > > > > > The testcase is > >

Re: maybe_fold_stmt (was: [gomp4] #pragma omp target* fixes)

> > >gimple_stmt_iterator gsi; > > >for (gsi = gsi_start (*body); !gsi_end_p (gsi); gsi_next (&gsi)) > > > lower_omp_1 (&gsi, ctx); > > > + /* Inside target region we haven't called fold_stmt during > > > gimplific

Re: lto-plugin: mismatch between ld's architecture and GCC's configure --host

* Makefile.def (host_modules): Add libiberty-linker-plugin. > > > > (host_modules) : Pay attention to > > > > @extra_linker_plugin_flags@ and > > > > @extra_linker_plugin_configure_flags@. > > > > (all-lto-plugin): Also depe

[gomp4] Initial support for OpenACC data clauses

Hi! Here is a patch series that adds initial support for OpenACC data clauses. It is not yet complete, but I thought I might as well already now strive to get this integrated upstream instead of "hoarding" the patches locally. Would it be a good idea to also commit to trunk the (portions of the)

Re: [gomp] Move openacc vector& worker single handling to RTL

n/gcc/branches/gomp-4_0-branch@225656 138bc75d-0d04-0410-961f-82ee72b054a4 --- gcc/ChangeLog.gomp |4 gcc/df-core.c |2 ++ 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+) diff --git gcc/ChangeLog.gomp gcc/ChangeLog.gomp index c71e396..535900c 100644 --- gcc/ChangeLog.gomp +++ gcc/ChangeLog.gomp @

[gomp4] Revert "Work around nvptx offloading compiler --enable-checking=yes,df,fold,rtl breakage" (was: fix df verify failure)

og.gomp gcc/ChangeLog.gomp index baff20c..1f57a9d 100644 --- gcc/ChangeLog.gomp +++ gcc/ChangeLog.gomp @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ +2015-07-11 Thomas Schwinge + + * df-core.c (df_analyze_1): Don't disable df_verify call. + 2015-07-10 Nathan Sidwell * config/nvptx/nvptx.c (nvptx_reorg): Mo

[gomp4] Resolve bootstrap failure in expand_GOACC_FORK, expand_GOACC_JOIN (was: Move openacc vector& worker single handling to RTL)

ertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git gcc/ChangeLog.gomp gcc/ChangeLog.gomp index 1f57a9d..ea3ea6b 100644 --- gcc/ChangeLog.gomp +++ gcc/ChangeLog.gomp @@ -1,5 +1,8 @@ 2015-07-11 Thomas Schwinge + * internal-fn.c (expand_GOACC_FORK, expand_GOACC_JOIN) + [!HAVE_oacc_fork]: Keep quiet

Merge trunk r225562 (2015-07-08) into gomp-4_0-branch (was: gomp4 merge)

Hi! On Fri, 10 Jul 2015 18:50:20 -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > it looks like the most recent merge from trunk to gomp4 was early May. I > think > it is time for another one -- can you handle that? Indeed :-) -- and, as it happens, resolving the "merge artifacts" is one of the things I've be

Re: [gomp4, committed] Handle nested loops in kernels regions

nest.c |3 --- 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.gomp gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.gomp index 636a087..4694a60 100644 --- gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.gomp +++ gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.gomp @@ -1,3 +1,8 @@ +2015-07-13 Thomas Schwinge + + * c-c++

Re: Merge trunk r225562 (2015-07-08) into gomp-4_0-branch

Hi Tom! On Mon, 13 Jul 2015 09:20:16 +0200, Tom de Vries wrote: > On 12/07/15 11:39, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > On Fri, 10 Jul 2015 18:50:20 -0400, Nathan Sidwell > > wrote: > >> it looks like the most recent merge from trunk to gomp4 was early May. I > >>

Re: Merge trunk r225562 (2015-07-08) into gomp-4_0-branch

Hi Tom! On Mon, 13 Jul 2015 12:32:20 +0200, Tom de Vries wrote: > On 13/07/15 10:31, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > On Mon, 13 Jul 2015 09:20:16 +0200, Tom de Vries > > wrote: > >> >On 12/07/15 11:39, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > >> >I've looked at t

Re: [gomp] Move openacc vector& worker single handling to RTL

| 5 + .../testsuite/libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/private-vars-loop-gang-5.c | 3 +++ 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+) diff --git libgomp/ChangeLog.gomp libgomp/ChangeLog.gomp index 6ee00be..fd7887a 100644 --- libgomp/ChangeLog.gomp +++ libgomp/ChangeLog.gomp @@ -1,3 +1,8 @@ +2015

Re: [gomp4] declare directive [5/5]

ns(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git libgomp/ChangeLog.gomp libgomp/ChangeLog.gomp index fd7887a..7d1e9ad 100644 --- libgomp/ChangeLog.gomp +++ libgomp/ChangeLog.gomp @@ -1,5 +1,7 @@ 2015-07-13 Thomas Schwinge + * testsuite/libgomp.oacc-c++/declare-1.C (foo): Initialize a. + * te

Re: [Patch, fortran] PR 37131, inline matmul

Hi! On Wed, 06 May 2015 22:26:31 +0200, Thomas Koenig wrote: > thanks for the review. I have committed the following [...] For nvptx-none targets, I'm seeing some odd behavior with this commit. Background: the nvptx backend has some special handling for varags functions, and this only works if

Re: [gomp] Move openacc vector& worker single handling to RTL

GEN_INT (GET_MODE_SIZE (GET_MODE (res); > + res = get_insns (); > + end_sequence (); > + } > + else > + rep = 1; > + data->offset += rep * GET_MODE_SIZE (GET_MODE (reg)); > + } > +

Re: [PATCH, gomp4] Propagate independent clause for OpenACC kernels pass

- 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git gcc/ChangeLog.gomp gcc/ChangeLog.gomp index dfe0c95..d7459d0 100644 --- gcc/ChangeLog.gomp +++ gcc/ChangeLog.gomp @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ +2015-07-14 Thomas Schwinge + + * omp-low.c (struct omp_region): Remove broadcast_array member. + 2015

Re: [PATCH, gomp4] Propagate independent clause for OpenACC kernels pass

Hi! On Tue, 14 Jul 2015 11:36:24 +0200, I wrote: > On Tue, 14 Jul 2015 13:46:04 +0800, Chung-Lin Tang > wrote: > > this patch provides a 'bool independent' field in struct loop, which > > will be switched on by an "independent" clause in a #pragma acc loop > > directive. > > Thanks! > > > Th

Re: [PATCH 6/n] OpenMP 4.0 offloading infrastructure: option handling

5d-0d04-0410-961f-82ee72b054a4 > --- > gcc/ChangeLog|8 > gcc/config/nvptx/mkoffload.c | 18 +- > 2 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git gcc/ChangeLog gcc/ChangeLog > index aaa06c3..d7455e4 100644 > --- gc

Re: [nvptx offloading] Only 64-bit configurations are currently supported

6 +++ > libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.oacc-c/c.exp |6 +++ > libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.oacc-fortran/fortran.exp |6 +++ > 7 files changed, 70 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) > > diff --git gcc/ChangeLog gcc/ChangeLog > index 33a2fa0..4c83723 100644 > --- gcc/C

PR65742: OpenACC acc_on_device fixes

e by a week): commit b73b9881a781f8e5572ce6c6a38f51696fc09b83 Author: Thomas Schwinge Date: Tue Jul 14 15:27:49 2015 +0200 OpenACC acc_on_device fixes Backport trunk r223801: PR libgomp/65742 gcc/ * builtins.c (expand_builtin_acc_on_device): Don'

Re: [gomp4] New test loop independent clause

Hi! On Tue, 14 Jul 2015 14:10:01 -0500, James Norris wrote: > The attached adds testing for the independent clause > with the loop directive in Fortran. > > Committed to gomp-4_0-branch. > --- /dev/null > +++ b/libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.oacc-fortran/kernels-independent.f90 Thanks! I had a lo

Re: [gomp] constify device data & fix cleanup

Hi! On Tue, 14 Jul 2015 19:59:17 -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > This patch turned out a little larger than expected as I ran into an API > limitation between libgomp and the plugins. > > The patch changes GOMP_offload_{,un}register to take a pointer to constant > target data. I've fixed up th

Re: [gomp4] New test loop independent clause

Hi Tom! On Wed, 15 Jul 2015 12:43:05 +0200, Tom de Vries wrote: > On 15/07/15 11:28, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > On Tue, 14 Jul 2015 14:10:01 -0500, James Norris > > wrote: > >> The attached adds testing for the independent clause > >> with the loop directive i

undefined reference to `acc_copyin_array_h_' (was: [PATCH] [gomp] Recycle non-nested team if possible)

Hallo! On Tue, 14 Jul 2015 13:47:41 +0200, Sebastian Huber wrote: > [...] > > I run the test suite on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu with the previously > mentioned asserts and got no unexpected failures. > > With --disable-linux-futex (without asserts) I got several failures, but > none of them i

Re: undefined reference to `acc_copyin_array_h_'

Hi! On Wed, 15 Jul 2015 15:25:19 +0200, Sebastian Huber wrote: > I deleted my build tree and started from scratch with the latest trunk > version. Now I don't get errors with --disable-linux-futex: > # of expected passes5145 > # of expected failures 8 > # of unsupported te

Re: [Patch, fortran] PR 37131, inline matmul

Hi! On Wed, 15 Jul 2015 13:44:38 +0200, Mikael Morin wrote: > Le 13/07/2015 21:54, Thomas Schwinge a écrit : > > Original situation; _gfortran_runtime_error is not being properly > > declared (invoked via gcc/fortran/frontend-passes.c:runtime_error_ne), >

Re: [gomp4] libgomp: Cope with DejaGnu having no mechanism to transfer environment variables to remote boards

ot.php?message_id=%3C8761ekpu1h.fsf%40schwinge.name%3E>, > and so on. > > > Until then: committed [...], with disgust. > > Until then: committed to gomp-4_0-branch in r223185, with disgust. > > commit 5803a3376041706672baede225a2dc47d70dd9a1 > Author: tschwinge > Date: Wed May 13 2

Re: [RFC, PR66873] Use graphite for parloops

Hi Tom! On Thu, 16 Jul 2015 10:46:00 +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 10:26 PM, Tom de Vries wrote: > > I tried to parallelize this fortran test-case (based on autopar/outer-1.c), > > [...] > > So I wondered, why not always use the graphite dependency analysis in > > parl

Re: [gomp] Fix PTX worker spill/fill

|5 + .../libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/private-vars-loop-gang-5.c |3 --- 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git libgomp/ChangeLog.gomp libgomp/ChangeLog.gomp index b2e4b2c..0293ad5 100644 --- libgomp/ChangeLog.gomp

Re: [gomp] Fix PTX worker spill/fill

gomp/ChangeLog.gomp +++ libgomp/ChangeLog.gomp @@ -1,4 +1,9 @@ 2015-07-17 Thomas Schwinge + Cesar Philippidis + + * testsuite/libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/worker-partn-8.c: New file. + +2015-07-17 Thomas Schwinge * testsuite/libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/private-vars-loop-gang-

Re: [gomp4] Remove device-specific filtering during parsing for OpenACC

Hi Julian! On Thu, 16 Jul 2015 16:32:12 +0100, Julian Brown wrote: > This patch removes the device-specific filtering (for NVidia PTX) from > the parsing stages of the host compiler (for the device_type clause -- > separately for C, C++ and Fortran) in favour of fully parsing the > device_type c

Re: [gomp] Move openacc vector& worker single handling to RTL

HARED=0 execution test Grüße, Thomas From a527ce3bcb60a4dbd8feb579dd90688b33760d78 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Thomas Schwinge Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 15:24:19 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] -O0 libgomp C, C++ testing --- libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.c++/c++.exp | 1 + libgomp/testsuite/libgom

Re: [gomp4] remove kernel-specific launch

Hi! On Sun, 19 Jul 2015 08:27:44 -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > Tom, > as we discussed this patch removes the GOACC_kernels call, which forwards to > GOACC_parallel. We simply call GOACC_parallel directly. > > ok for gomp4 branch? > gcc/ > * omp-low.c (expand_omp_target): Convert

Re: [gomp4] remove kernel-specific launch

Hi! Thanks for the cleanup! On Mon, 20 Jul 2015 11:54:48 +0200, Tom de Vries wrote: > On 19/07/15 23:08, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > > On 07/19/15 16:30, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > >> Does it make sense then to rename GOACC_kernels_internal to > >> GOACC_kernels? > &

Re: [gomp] Move openacc vector& worker single handling to RTL

Hi Nathan! On Tue, 21 Jul 2015 16:05:05 -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > On 07/18/15 11:37, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 20:25:22 -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > >> This is the patch I committed. [...] > > > > Prompted by your recent "-O0 pat

Re: [gomp4] libgomp: Cope with DejaGnu having no mechanism to transfer environment variables to remote boards

ind-root.php?message_id=%3C87iobwjfh1.fsf%40schwinge.name%3E>, but this is clearly not acceptable for commit. On Thu, 14 May 2015 10:54:07 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 10:05:36AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 12:10:50AM +0200, Thomas

libgomp testing, RUNTESTFLAGS (was: [gomp4] libgomp: Cope with DejaGnu having no mechanism to transfer environment variables to remote boards)

Hi! (Cesar, you had the same question.) On Thu, 14 May 2015 11:26:15 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Talking about the libgomp testsuite, can we rename the > libgomp/testsuite/libgomp-oacc-*/*.exp files to something unique? > I mean, trying to run say just the OpenMP C tests is impossible since >

Re: [gomp4, PATCH] Fix libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/lib-3.c

ngeLog.gomp | 4 libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/lib-3.c | 10 +- 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git libgomp/ChangeLog.gomp libgomp/ChangeLog.gomp index 746003f..d71282c 100644 --- libgomp/ChangeLog.gomp +++ libgomp/C

[gomp4] libgomp: Additional acc_shutdown bug fixing and testing (was: [gomp4, PATCH] Fix libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/lib-3.c)

uite/libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/lib-8.c | 16 3 files changed, 21 insertions(+) diff --git libgomp/ChangeLog.gomp libgomp/ChangeLog.gomp index d71282c..0d3c62f 100644 --- libgomp/ChangeLog.gomp +++ libgomp/ChangeLog.gomp @@ -1,5 +1,8 @@ 2015-07-22 Thomas Schwinge

[gomp4] libgomp testsuite: Remove some explicit acc_device_nvidia usage (was: [gomp4, PATCH] Fix libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/lib-3.c)

/ChangeLog.gomp +++ libgomp/ChangeLog.gomp @@ -1,5 +1,11 @@ 2015-07-22 Thomas Schwinge + * testsuite/libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/lib-1.c: Remove explicit + acc_device_nvidia usage. + * testsuite/libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/lib-10.c: Likewise. + * testsuite/libgomp.oacc-c-c

Re: [WIP] OpenMP 4 NVPTX support

6e525f64aa103312e8e0ac88048122 Author: Thomas Schwinge Date: Wed Jul 22 12:12:41 2015 +0200 Empty libgomp for nvptx $ mkdir libgomp/config/nvptx $ cp libgomp/config/{linux,nvptx}/omp-lock.h $ for f in libgomp{,/config/linux,/config/posix}/*.c; do touch libgomp/

[gomp4] libgomp: Some torture testing for C and C++ OpenACC test cases (was: [gomp] Move openacc vector& worker single handling to RTL)

Hi! On Wed, 22 Jul 2015 12:47:32 -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > On 07/20/15 11:08, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > > On 07/20/15 09:01, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > >> On 07/18/15 11:37, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > >>> For OpenACC nvptx offloading, there must still be something

Re: [gomp4] Additional tests for routine directive

Hi! On Fri, 24 Jul 2015 15:43:36 -0500, James Norris wrote: > The attached patch adds additional test for the routine > directive for C/C++/Fortran. > > Committed to gomp-4_0-branch. Thanks, but I see a number of FAILs, including the following: FAIL: libgomp.oacc-c/../libgomp.oacc-c-c++-c

Re: [gomp4] acc routines bugfix

Hi Cesar! On Fri, 24 Jul 2015 08:05:00 -0700, Cesar Philippidis wrote: > [...] I couldn't > think of a way to test the lto error message because that involves > having two compilers present. I wonder if it's ok to have libgomp check > for compiler expected compiler errors? However, that's more o

Re: [gomp4, fortran] Patch to fix continuation checks of OpenACC and OpenMP directives

Hi! On Tue, 30 Jun 2015 03:39:42 +0300, Ilmir Usmanov wrote: > 08.06.2015, 17:59, "Cesar Philippidis" : > > On 06/07/2015 02:05 PM, Ilmir Usmanov wrote: > >> 08.06.2015, 00:01, "Ilmir Usmanov" : > This patch fixes checks of OpenMP and OpenACC continuations in > case if someone mixes

Re: Fix logic error in Fortran OpenACC parsing

Hi! On Fri, 8 May 2015 14:24:15 +0300, Ilmir Usmanov wrote: > On 06.05.2015 14:38, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > On Tue, 5 May 2015 15:38:03 -0400, David Malcolm > > wrote: > >> On Wed, 2015-04-29 at 14:10 +0200, Mikael Morin wrote: > >>> Le 29/04/2015 02:02,

Re: [gomp4] Add new oacc_transform patch

Hi! On Tue, 21 Jul 2015 10:15:05 -0700, Cesar Philippidis wrote: > Jakub, > > Nathan pointed out that I should make the fold_oacc_reductions pass that > I introduced in my reduction patch more generic so that other openacc > transformations may use it. This patch introduces an empty skeleton pa

Re: [gomp4] Fix some gomp tests

Hi Nathan! On Sat, 25 Jul 2015 16:02:01 -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > I've committed this to gomp4 branch. It fixes some tests that were incorrect Hmm, I fail to see what you deem incorrect in the following two Fortran test cases? Implicit present_or_copy clauses should be added by the compi

Re: [gomp4] Fix some gomp tests

Hi Nathan! On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 08:19:17 -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > On 07/28/15 06:14, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > On Sat, 25 Jul 2015 16:02:01 -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > >> I've committed this to gomp4 branch. It fixes some tests that were > >> inco

Re: [gomp4] Redesign oacc_parallel launch API

Hi Nathan! On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 12:52:02 -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > I've committed this patch to the gomp4 branch to redo the launch API. I'll > post > a version for trunk once the versioning patch gets approved & committed. Thanks! (I have not yet looked at the patch in detail.) There

<    5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   >