Hi, On Wed, Apr 03 2019, sameeran joshi wrote: > On 4/3/19, Martin Jambor <mjam...@suse.cz> wrote: >> Hello Joshi, >> >> On Mon, Apr 01 2019, sameeran joshi wrote: >>> HI, >>> Discussing the project with Andi, I have drafted a proposal, please >>> review and suggest >>> necessary changes. >>> If some OpenMP experts from GCC have some ideas or changes please >>> suggest. >>> >>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1axElw-I5pTwcjI4iMle5NhLeRCcshIjH5ZHm3GGwsZU/edit?usp=sharing >> >> I will leave most of the evaluation on Andi (and assume he likes the >> proposal, by the way). However, I have read the proposal, I like it and >> I consider it very useful but also possibly quite ambitious. But we can >> adjust expectations as we go forward. >> >> Please consider fixing some of the formatting in the document, >> especially of the code snippets, sometimes they are a bit difficult to > > Thanks for pointing it, I have indented them.
Great, it indeed is now much better. > >> read without any indentation. That may be also the reason why I don't >> quite understand what is the relationship of omp tasks and loops or >> uninitialized local arrays. > > I have removed the location to insert for OMP tasks at 'uninitialized > local array initialization'. > Only kept it for as it was getting more complex. > > 1. while loops > 2. nested for loops OK. > > If you could suggest which constructs do you feel more ambitious?, so The one thing I am quite intrigued by is how exactly you will detect data races, but I assume a conservative but useful approach will not be too difficult to devise. > I could work on it to modify them. Don't worry about the remark too much. The proposal looks solid. Martin
