search for: libiomp

On 30 April 2015 at 10:06, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: >> >> I'd like to resurrect the discussion on replacing libgomp with >> libiomp as the default OpenMP runtime library linked with -fopenmp. >> >> >> For reference, the previous discussion is accessible there: >> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-20140217/thread.html#99461 >> >> >> We are very close to getting *...

...t;Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov>, "C Bergström" <cbergstrom at pathscale.com>, "Michael Wong" >> <fraggamuffin at gmail.com>, "Alexey Bataev" <a.bataev at gmx.com> >> Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2015 8:49:30 AM >> Subject: libiomp, not libgomp as default library linked with -fopenmp >> >> >> All, >> >> >> I'd like to resurrect the discussion on replacing libgomp with >> libiomp as the default OpenMP runtime library linked with -fopenmp. >> >> >> For reference, t...

On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 5:51 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 6:52 AM Andrey Bokhanko <andreybokhanko at gmail.com> > wrote: > >> All, >> >> I'd like to resurrect the discussion on replacing libgomp with libiomp as >> the default OpenMP runtime library linked with -fopenmp. >> > > Just for the record, I'm really excited to see this. =] > > >> We are very close to getting *full* OpenMP 3.1 specification supported in >> clang (only one (!) clause is not implemented yet...

Chandler, Thanks for the reply -- I always included you in libiomp supporters camp; it is good to see I wasn't mistaken! ;-) On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 12:51 AM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > Is there no way to support libgomp here as well? I don't say this to hold > up changing the defaults in any way, just curious. =] >...

...rc at google.com> >> wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 6:52 AM Andrey Bokhanko < >>> andreybokhanko at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> All, >>>> >>>> I'd like to resurrect the discussion on replacing libgomp with libiomp >>>> as the default OpenMP runtime library linked with -fopenmp. >>>> >>> >>> Just for the record, I'm really excited to see this. =] >>> >>> >>>> We are very close to getting *full* OpenMP 3.1 specification supported >&...

Hal, On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 5:06 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > We need to get the build system integration committed and the buildbots > updated to compile it > If you are speaking on libiomp buidbots, they are already established: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/libiomp5-clang-x86_64-linux-debian http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/libiomp5-gcc-x86_64-linux-debian Andrey -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail...

On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 2:51 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 6:52 AM Andrey Bokhanko <andreybokhanko at gmail.com> > wrote: > >> All, >> >> I'd like to resurrect the discussion on replacing libgomp with libiomp as >> the default OpenMP runtime library linked with -fopenmp. >> > > Just for the record, I'm really excited to see this. =] > > >> We are very close to getting *full* OpenMP 3.1 specification supported in >> clang (only one (!) clause is not implemented yet...

All, I'd like to resurrect the discussion on replacing libgomp with libiomp as the default OpenMP runtime library linked with -fopenmp. For reference, the previous discussion is accessible there: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-20140217/thread.html#99461 We are very close to getting *full* OpenMP 3.1 specification supported in clang (only one (...

Now that the commit of... ------------------------------------------------------------------------ r236534 | achurbanov | 2015-05-05 16:02:52 -0400 (Tue, 05 May 2015) | 13 lines Integrate libiomp CMake into LLVM CMake build system. This patch integrates the libiomp CMake build system into the LLVM CMake build system so that users can checkout libiomp into the projects directory of llvm and build llvm,clang, and libiomp all together. These changes specifically introduce a new install targe...

Why is this thread still going? Isn't the most pragmatic choice to just make it a build configuration option and be done? Then whoever is actually packaging it can make the most sensible choice for their needs.. Should I send a patch so this bikeshed thread can die?

On Sat, May 02, 2015 at 11:18:35PM +0300, Andrey Bokhanko wrote: > 3) Some people believe that libiomp is not a proper name anymore and > should be changed. I'm not a library expert, so really don't know. > However, this means that we should flip default library setting ASAP. > Why? Because now "libiomp5" is a user-visible name (one has to use > "-fopenmp=libiomp5&...

...t at all. As I ponted out before, people from Intel are not the right ones to be inserting compatiblity tables for the runtime when it is running on IBM Power or ARM processors. The people who know about that should contribute… - I suspect we should change the name of the installed library. 'libiomp' is pretty clearly the Intel library. We could continue in the grand tradition of LLVM naming conventions and use 'libllomp'? Of course, we should install symlinks under the name 'libiomp' if needed for existing users to not be broken. Changing the file name (at least when t...

...n Fri, May 1, 2015 at 3:56 PM, Jack Howarth <howarth.mailing.lists at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 4:45 AM, Andrey Bokhanko <andreybokhanko at gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> Chandler, >> >> Thanks for the reply -- I always included you in libiomp supporters camp; >> it is good to see I wasn't mistaken! ;-) >> >> On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 12:51 AM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> Is there no way to support libgomp here as well? I don't say this to hold >>...

...aned tests: > O Number of failed tests: 8 > O + from this fail compilation: 0 > O + from this timed out 0 > O Number of successful tests: 53 > O + from this were verified: 52 > > for 'make ctest' using "-fopenmp=libiomp5 -Xclang -fopenmp=libiomp5 > -L/sw/opt/llvm-3.7.0/lib -lm -O3". Whereas for libgomp, the results are > pitiful.... > > Summary: > S Number of tested Open MP constructs: 62 > S Number of used tests: 123 > S Number of failed tests: 30 > S Numbe...

A couple more data points. Current llvm 3.7svn with the two outstanding OPENMP patches can build the openmp support in gdl 0.9.5 (which completely passes its test suite) and apbs 1.4.1's limited openmp support. On Sat, May 2, 2015 at 11:11 PM, Jack Howarth < howarth.mailing.lists at gmail.com> wrote: > On a positive note, current llvm 3.7svn with the two outstanding > OPENMP

On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 11:59:52AM +0100, Renato Golin wrote: > Tom, code owner nomination. > > Andrey is the most active developer, so I think it makes sense. How > long do we wait to change the file? Is there any process that you'd > like to follow? > I don't think there is a formal process, but usually the file gets updated once Chris approves. -Tom > cheers,