On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 10:07:18PM +0000, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
> I looked at both but forgot to test them with my implementation. Sorry
> about this. I have fixed the ICE issue. To make sure this does not
> happen further, I have added your test cf3.C into test suite (renamed to
> cf3.cc). I hope that is OK with you.
The testcase is GPL as the original libgomp.c++/for-1.C testcase, so sure.
Perhaps it would be much better though if instead of having a compile time
testcase you'd just do what libgomp.c++/for-1.C does, just replace all the
#pragma omp parallel for in there with _Cilk_for and turn it into a runtime
testcase.
> I have attached a fixed patch and Changelogs. Is this OK?
Looks better (note, still looking just at the dumps), but not completely ok
yet. On cf3.cc, I see in *.gimple:
D.2883 = J<int>::begin (j);
I<int>::I (&i, D.2883);
D.2885 = J<int>::end (j);
retval.0 = operator-<int> (D.2885, &i);
D.2886 = retval.0 / 2;
#pragma omp parallel firstprivate(i) if(D.2886) shared(D.2865) shared(j)
{
difference_type retval.1;
const struct I & D.2888;
const difference_type D.2866;
long int D.2889;
struct I & D.2890;
try
{
_Cilk_for (D.2864 = 0; D.2864 < retval.1; D.2864 = D.2864 + 2)
private(D.2864)
{
D.2889 = D.2864 - D.2865;
D.2866 = D.2889;
try
{
D.2890 = I<int>::operator+= (&i, &D.2866);
First a minor nit, there is extra newline before _Cilk_for:
newline_and_indent (buffer, spc);
if (flag_cilkplus
&& gimple_omp_for_kind (gs) == GF_OMP_FOR_KIND_CILKFOR)
pp_string (buffer, "_Cilk_for (");
else
pp_string (buffer, "for (");
I guess for _Cilk_for collapse is never > 1, right? If that is the case,
then perhaps you should move the newline_and_indent (buffer, spc); call
into the else block.
More importantly, what is retval.1? I'd expect you should be using retval.0
there and have it also as firstprivate(retval.0) on the parallel.
In *.omplower dump I actually see:
retval.0 = operator-<int> (D.2885, &i);
...
retval.1 = operator-<int> (D.2888, &i);
i.e. operator-<int> is called twice.
Jakub
