[Openmp-dev] Location for omptarget

Narayanaswamy, Ravi via Openmp-dev openmp-dev at lists.llvm.org
Fri Sep 30 10:56:42 PDT 2016


So are target regions offloaded? What does liboffload do if it doesn't help a target region get offloaded onto the device? (I realize that you can implement a target region as tasks, but why can't we leverage the existing task code to accomplish that then..

The existing task code is used to schedule the target regions, not the data communication which is done in omptarget.  

-----Original Message-----
From: C Bergström [mailto:cbergstrom at pathscale.com] 
Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 4:35 AM
To: Hahnfeld, Jonas <Hahnfeld at itc.rwth-aachen.de>
Cc: Narayanaswamy, Ravi <ravi.narayanaswamy at intel.com>; LLVM-OpenMP (openmp-dev at lists.llvm.org) <openmp-dev at lists.llvm.org>
Subject: Re: [Openmp-dev] Location for omptarget

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 2:23 PM, Hahnfeld, Jonas <Hahnfeld at itc.rwth-aachen.de> wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: C Bergström [mailto:cbergstrom at pathscale.com]
>> Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 8:18 AM
>> To: Hahnfeld, Jonas
>> Cc: Narayanaswamy, Ravi; LLVM-OpenMP (openmp-dev at lists.llvm.org)
>> Subject: Re: [Openmp-dev] Location for omptarget
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 2:05 PM, Hahnfeld, Jonas via Openmp-dev 
>> <openmp- dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > I’m fine with putting libomptarget next to libomp as they are both 
>> > clearly related to each other and to OpenMP.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > However, I wonder whether it might be a good idea to move both 
>> > under the umbrella of parallel-libs in the long term.
>> >
>> > We can still keep the subdomain or make it a redirect, but if LLVM 
>> > has a collection of “parallel-libs” I think the OpenMP runtime 
>> > libraries should join the fun.
>>
>> Non-binding votes
>>
>> I'm +1 for libomptarget to be named liboffload and made a generic new 
>> project. I could potentially help contribute to this. Even if it 
>> starts only with a dependency on tasking, the future direction is clear.
>>
>> I'm -1 for libomptarget to be named something confusing or which 
>> isn't generic
>
> We already have "liboffload", I don't think that’s a clever name... I'm fine with "libomptarget" but I don't really care too much about the name.

Some semi-sarcastic questions if you don't mind
------------
So are target regions offloaded? What does liboffload do if it doesn't help a target region get offloaded onto the device? (I realize that you can implement a target region as tasks, but why can't we leverage the existing task code to accomplish that then..


More information about the Openmp-dev mailing list