[Openmp-dev] PPC64 patch from Intel's fourth cmake patch

[Bataev, Alexey]

> As you've discovered, clang-omp currently does not use the arbitrary-length-parameter-list aspect of the microtasks. I've cc'd Alexey here, and perhaps he can describe why. I suspect that using function parameters directly, instead of putting everything into structures, will be easier on the IPA (and more efficient -- although it is not clear how important that is relative to the dispatching overhead).
There are 2 reasons to use structure.
1. All variables are captured by CapturedStmt into record and I just 
reused what we already had in the code base.
2. There were plans to modify implementation of __kmpc_fork_call() 
function and replace a list of references to shared variables by a 
single pointer to a record of references to shared variables (just like 
it is done in libgomp). Probably Jim Cownie can tell a little bit more 
about it.

Best regards,
Alexey Bataev
=============
Software Engineer
Intel Compiler Team
Intel Corp.

20.08.2014 4:29, Hal Finkel пишет:
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Carlo Bertolli" <cbertol at us.ibm.com>
>> To: "C. Bergström" <cbergstrom at pathscale.com>
>> Cc: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov>, "James H Cownie" <james.h.cownie at intel.com>, "Michael Wong"
>> <michaelw at ca.ibm.com>, openmp-dev at dcs-maillist2.engr.illinois.edu
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 6, 2014 12:59:42 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Openmp-dev] PPC64 patch from Intel's fourth cmake patch
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> No apologies needed - I am glad that you highlighted these issues and
>> that you helped making the patch stronger.
>> Let me see what I can do about the imlementation of
>> kmp__invoke_microtask.
> Thanks for looking into this. As you've discovered, clang-omp currently does not use the arbitrary-length-parameter-list aspect of the microtasks. I've cc'd Alexey here, and perhaps he can describe why. I suspect that using function parameters directly, instead of putting everything into structures, will be easier on the IPA (and more efficient -- although it is not clear how important that is relative to the dispatching overhead).
>
>   -Hal
>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> -- Carlo
>>
>> Inactive hide details for "C. Bergström" ---08/06/2014 01:37:30
>> PM---On 08/ 6/14 11:27 PM, Carlo Bertolli wrote: >"C. Bergström"
>> ---08/06/2014 01:37:30 PM---On 08/ 6/14 11:27 PM, Carlo Bertolli
>> wrote: >
>>
>> From: "C. Bergström" <cbergstrom at pathscale.com>
>> To: Carlo Bertolli/Watson/IBM at IBMUS
>> Cc: Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov>, "Cownie, James H"
>> <james.h.cownie at intel.com>, Michael Wong <michaelw at ca.ibm.com>,
>> "openmp-dev at dcs-maillist2.engr.illinois.edu"
>> <openmp-dev at dcs-maillist2.engr.illinois.edu>
>> Date: 08/06/2014 01:37 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Openmp-dev] PPC64 patch from Intel's fourth cmake patch
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 08/ 6/14 11:27 PM, Carlo Bertolli wrote:
>>> Hi C. Bergström,
>>>
>>> My answers below interspersed with your comments.
>>>
>> Apologies - My comments were meant to be general and your patch just
>> made some fugly areas more visible. Hopefully this clears up the
>> confusion. For our BGQ (IBM Power7 A2) work I certainly appreciate
>> this.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>>