Hi! On 2024-07-15T12:16:30+0100, Andrew Stubbs <a...@baylibre.com> wrote: > On 15/07/2024 10:29, Thomas Schwinge wrote: >> On 2021-11-12T18:58:04+0100, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches >> <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: >>> And finally here is a third version, [...] >> >> ... which became commit 9fa72756d90e0d9edadf6e6f5f56476029925788 >> "libgomp, nvptx: Honor OpenMP 5.1 num_teams lower bound". >> >> Attached here is "GCN: Honor OpenMP 5.1 'num_teams' lower bound", which >> are exactly the corresponding changes for GCN (see below Jakub's nvptx >> changes for reference); OK to push?
> That's a lot of convoluted logic to drop in without a single comment! Well, I'll pass that compliment over to Jakub ;-) -- my code changes just intend to be a faithful "'s%nvptx%GCN'" of his code changes from back then. > The GCN bits look fine, and I assume you've probably thought about the > logic here a lot, but I've no idea what you're trying to achieve, or why > you're trying to achieve it (from the patch alone). > > Can we have some comments on motivation and goals, please? Here's the original context: - <https://inbox.sourceware.org/20211111190313.GV2710@tucnak> "[PATCH] openmp: Honor OpenMP 5.1 num_teams lower bound" - <https://inbox.sourceware.org/20211112132023.GC2710@tucnak> "[PATCH] libgomp, nvptx: Honor OpenMP 5.1 num_teams lower bound" Is that sufficient, and/or would you like to see some commentary to the relevant libgomp generic/nvptx/GCN code added? Grüße Thomas
