[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gomp-discuss] Plan ... coments wanted !
From: |
Diego Novillo |
Subject: |
Re: [Gomp-discuss] Plan ... coments wanted ! |
Date: |
Thu, 30 Jan 2003 09:34:08 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.4i |
On Thu, 30 Jan 2003, Lars Segerlund wrote:
> They handle the OpenMP stuff to libcalls after some optimizations (
> how do you spell this ? ), thus in the GIMPLE->RTL phase. However some
> work has to be done before this !
>
> Also they don't generate subroutines which are executed in parallell,
> they generate a 'reentrant code section' with shared locals available to
> all threads, and a copy in/out scheme for private ( real local variables
> , for thae thread ).
>
Yes, that's correct. Those are all code generation tricks that
are to be expected. All these should be done *after* we are done
analysing and transforming the input program. That's done in the
GIMPLE->RTL phase, and there might even be some work to do in the
backend of the compiler (RTL->asm phase).
> I have a suspicion that we might be able to target GENERIC and
> generate annotated GIMPLE, how does this sound ? ( This is one part
> which I need to read up on, sorry my understanding of some issues are
> lacking ).
>
You don't annotate the trees if at all possible. Create new tree
codes that have the exact semantics you want. What I mean by
this: Suppose you want to mark a parallel loop. You don't just
annotate a LOOP_EXPR. You create a new tree node called
FORALL_EXPR (or whatever suitable name).
That is a lot cleaner and easier to handle than arbitrary
annotations. Annotations should be reserved for attributes and
secondary data that you want to associate to a tree.
Diego.
- Re: [Gomp-discuss] Plan ... coments wanted !, (continued)
- Re: [Gomp-discuss] Plan ... coments wanted !, Steven Bosscher, 2003/01/29
- Re: [Gomp-discuss] Plan ... coments wanted !, Diego Novillo, 2003/01/29
- Re: [Gomp-discuss] Plan ... coments wanted !, Steven Bosscher, 2003/01/29
- Re: [Gomp-discuss] Plan ... coments wanted !, Diego Novillo, 2003/01/29
- Re: [Gomp-discuss] Plan ... coments wanted !, Steven Bosscher, 2003/01/30
- Re: [Gomp-discuss] Plan ... coments wanted !, Lars Segerlund, 2003/01/30
- Re: [Gomp-discuss] Plan ... coments wanted !, Diego Novillo, 2003/01/30
- Re: [Gomp-discuss] Plan ... coments wanted !, Lars Segerlund, 2003/01/30
- Re: [Gomp-discuss] Plan ... coments wanted !, Steven Bosscher, 2003/01/30
- Re: [Gomp-discuss] Plan ... coments wanted !, Lars Segerlund, 2003/01/30
- Re: [Gomp-discuss] Plan ... coments wanted !,
Diego Novillo <=
- Re: [Gomp-discuss] Plan ... coments wanted !, Pop Sébastian, 2003/01/30
- Re: [Gomp-discuss] Plan ... coments wanted !, Steven Bosscher, 2003/01/30
- Re: [Gomp-discuss] Plan ... coments wanted !, Diego Novillo, 2003/01/30
- RE: [Gomp-discuss] Plan ... coments wanted !, Scott Robert Ladd, 2003/01/30
- RE: [Gomp-discuss] Plan ... coments wanted !, Steven Bosscher, 2003/01/31
- RE: [Gomp-discuss] Plan ... coments wanted !, Biagio Lucini, 2003/01/31
- Re: [Gomp-discuss] Plan ... coments wanted !, Lars Segerlund, 2003/01/31
- Re: [Gomp-discuss] Plan ... coments wanted !, Pop Sébastian, 2003/01/31
Re: [Gomp-discuss] Plan ... coments wanted !, Pop Sébastian, 2003/01/29
Re: [Gomp-discuss] Plan ... coments wanted !, Pop Sébastian, 2003/01/29