r295473 - [OpenMP] Remove barriers at cancel and cancellation point

[Hans Wennborg via cfe-commits]

Oops, it did. Thanks for reminding me; I've merged that in r296139.

On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 11:13 PM, Hahnfeld, Jonas
<Hahnfeld at itc.rwth-aachen.de> wrote:
> Hi Hans,
>
> Did r295474 fall off your radar? Sorry that I asked for both commits in one email, should I reply to the other original commit?
>
> Thanks,
> Jonas
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: hwennborg at google.com [mailto:hwennborg at google.com] On Behalf
>> Of Hans Wennborg
>> Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 7:46 PM
>> To: Alexey Bataev
>> Cc: Hahnfeld, Jonas; cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org
>> Subject: Re: r295473 - [OpenMP] Remove barriers at cancel and cancellation
>> point
>>
>> Thanks! r296000.
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 8:15 PM, Alexey Bataev <a.bataev at hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Yes, approved
>> >
>> > Best regards,
>> > Alexey Bataev
>> >
>> >> 23 февр. 2017 г., в 1:00, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org>
>> написал(а):
>> >>
>> >> Alexey: ping?
>> >>
>> >>> On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 11:07 AM, Hans Wennborg
>> <hans at chromium.org> wrote:
>> >>> I'm Ok with it if Alexey approves.
>> >>>
>> >>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 10:52 AM, Hahnfeld, Jonas
>> >>> <Hahnfeld at itc.rwth-aachen.de> wrote:
>> >>>> Hi Hans, Alexey,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> can we merge this commit and r295474 for the 4.0 release or is it
>> >>>> already too late for that? I will totally understand that and can
>> >>>> apply these commits locally prior to installing.
>> >>>> However, I think that these changes are quite focussed and bear
>> >>>> minimal possibility of introducing regressions.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Thanks,
>> >>>> Jonas
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Am Freitag, den 17.02.2017, 18:32 +0000 schrieb Jonas Hahnfeld via
>> >>>> cfe-commits:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Author: hahnfeld
>> >>>> Date: Fri Feb 17 12:32:51 2017
>> >>>> New Revision: 295473
>> >>>>
>> >>>> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=295473&view=rev
>> >>>> Log:
>> >>>> [OpenMP] Remove barriers at cancel and cancellation point
>> >>>>
>> >>>> This resolves a deadlock with the cancel directive when there is no
>> >>>> explicit cancellation point. In that case, the implicit barrier
>> >>>> acts as cancellation point. After removing the barrier after
>> >>>> cancel, the now unmatched barrier for the explicit cancellation
>> >>>> point has to go as well.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> This has probably worked before rL255992: With the calls for the
>> >>>> explicit barrier, it was sure that all threads passed a barrier before
>> exiting.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Reported by Simon Convent and Joachim Protze!
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30088
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Modified:
>> >>>>    cfe/trunk/lib/CodeGen/CGOpenMPRuntime.cpp
>> >>>>    cfe/trunk/test/OpenMP/cancel_codegen.cpp
>> >>>>    cfe/trunk/test/OpenMP/cancellation_point_codegen.cpp