search for: no_interiteration_dependencies

Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "no_interiteration_dependencies".

2013 Jan 29
1
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] parallel loop metadata
On 01/29/2013 10:17 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: > Will parallel always be synonymous with no_interiteration_dependencies? I'm > sightly worried that 'parallel' seems too much like a directive, and we may > want it to mean something else in the future. I think the semantics of a "parallel loop" is: If my loop, I hereby state as "parallel", has loop-carried dependencies, I...
2013 Jan 29
0
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] parallel loop metadata
....parallel" or similar and we can add a separate one for > the assumed_dep later on. This one would support the truly parallel > loops (at least OpenMP for and OpenCL WIloops) where no compiler > checking at all can be assumed by the programmer. Will parallel always be synonymous with no_interiteration_dependencies? I'm sightly worried that 'parallel' seems too much like a directive, and we may want it to mean something else in the future. -Hal > > Any objections? Paul Redmond? > > -- > --Pekka > > _______________________________________________ > llvm-commits mailin...
2013 Jan 29
5
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] parallel loop metadata
On 01/29/2013 08:22 PM, Dan Gohman wrote: > "Ignore assumed dependencies" is shaky semantics. I haven't seen anything > explicitly spell out which dependencies a compiler is guaranteed to detect. > How can users use such a directive safely in a loop which has dependencies? > I understand that this is what icc's documentation says, but I'm wondering > if