https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=49588
Kim Walisch <kim.wali...@gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--- Comment #3 from Kim Walisch <kim.wali...@gmail.com> ---
I was able to fix my particular scaling issue by using
schedule(monotonic:dynamic, 1) instead of schedule(dynamic, 1) (which is the
same as schedule(nonmonotonic:dynamic, 1)).
My algorithms work best when the iterations are executed in "increasing logical
iteration order". This partially explains why the default schedule(dynamic, 1)
is not well suited for my particular use case as iterations may be executed in
any order. I will note however that GCC's schedule(nonmonotonic:dynamic, 1)
scales very nicely in my benchmarks, so I do think that there is room for
improvement in Clang/libomp's schedule(nonmonotonic:dynamic, 1) implementation.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug._______________________________________________
llvm-bugs mailing list
llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
