search for: parallel_do

...ld the above be represented in OpenMP dialect? and What type would "x" be in MLIR? It is not mentioned in the design as to how the various SSA values for various OpenMP clauses are passed around in OpenMP operations. D. Because of (A), (B) and (C), it would be beneficial to have an omp. parallel_do operation which has semantics similar to other loop structures (may not be LoopLikeInterface) in MLIR. To me, it looks like having OpenMP operations based on standard MLIR types and operations (scalars and memrefs mainly) is the right way to go. Why not have omp.parallel_do operation with AffineMa...

...e lowered to OpenMP dialect. > > Yes, it is not mentioned. We did a study of a few constructs and clauses > which was shared as mails to flang-dev and the RFC. As we make progress and > before implementation, we will share further details. > > it would be beneficial to have an omp.parallel_do operation which has > semantics similar to other loop structures (may not be LoopLikeInterface) > in MLIR. > > I am not against adding parallel_do if it can help with transformations or > reduce the complexity of lowering. Please share the details in discourse as > a reply to the...

...t;> Yes, it is not mentioned. We did a study of a few constructs and clauses >>> which was shared as mails to flang-dev and the RFC. As we make progress and >>> before implementation, we will share further details. >>> >>> it would be beneficial to have an omp.parallel_do operation which has >>> semantics similar to other loop structures (may not be LoopLikeInterface) >>> in MLIR. >>> >>> I am not against adding parallel_do if it can help with transformations >>> or reduce the complexity of lowering. Please share the deta...

...We did a study of a few constructs and >>>>> clauses which was shared as mails to flang-dev and the RFC. As we make >>>>> progress and before implementation, we will share further details. >>>>> >>>>> it would be beneficial to have an omp.parallel_do operation which has >>>>> semantics similar to other loop structures (may not be LoopLikeInterface) >>>>> in MLIR. >>>>> >>>>> I am not against adding parallel_do if it can help with >>>>> transformations or reduce the compl...

...e would > > "x" be in MLIR? It is not mentioned in the design as to how the various > > SSA values for various OpenMP clauses are passed around in OpenMP > > operations. > > > > D. Because of (A), (B) and (C), it would be beneficial to have an omp. > > parallel_do operation which has semantics similar to other loop > structures > > (may not be LoopLikeInterface) in MLIR. To me, it looks like having > OpenMP > > operations based on standard MLIR types and operations (scalars and > memrefs > > mainly) is the right way to go. > &gt...

Agreed! Is the code already available? What are your plans for it, and are you interested in collaboration with the rest of the LLVM community? -Chris > On Jan 11, 2020, at 11:58 AM, Finkel, Hal J. via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hi, Prashanth, > > That's great news! It sounds like you've made a lot of progress, and I certainly hope that you