similar to: [LLVMdev] LLVM and OpenMP

Hi, In the beginning I'd like to say I am not very familiar with (llvm-)gcc internals, so some of my assumptions and guesses may be wrong. Please, correct me, then. Anton Korobeynikov wrote: > Internally OpenMP lowering in gcc is split into two phases. Funny, but > llvm converter is run between these phases :) It looks like second phase > uses some gcc analysis passes (like

Hello! Currently, when a program built without OpenMP (-fopenmp) is trying to dlopen a library, built with the feature, the result is a crash from "bad system call": #0 0x00000008009a223c in ksem_init () from /lib/libc.so.7 #1 0x0000000800998a8f in sem_init () from /lib/libc.so.7 #2 0x00000008011a6537 in omp_get_nested () from /usr/lib/libgomp.so.1 #3

The PTX back-end is robust (it's based on the sources used by nvcc), but I'm not sure about the OpenMP representation in LLVM IR. I believe the OpenMP constructs are already lowered into libgomp calls before leaving DragonEgg. It's been awhile since I've loooked at it though. If you use the PTX back-end and have any issues, please don't hesitate to post to the list and cc:

Hi, Is it possible to translate an OpenMP program to CUDA using LLVM? I read that dragonegg has a OpenMP front-end and LLVM has a PTX back-end. I don't know how mature these tools are. Please let me know. Thanks. -Apala Postdoctoral Scholar Department of Computer Science, University of Chicago Computation Institute, Argonne National Laboratory http://sites.google.com/site/apalaguha/home/

It will come on next week. I'd like to give a chance to everyone to raise their objections first. Yours, Andrey > 8 мая 2015 г., в 18:30, Jack Howarth <howarth.mailing.lists at gmail.com> написал(а): > > Is there a proposed patch yet for switching the -fopenmp support over > to the openmp library instead of libgomp? I realize the call to rename > the library may be

No, just changing defaults -- subject to code reviewers approval. As I said before, I prefer to leave library naming to library pros. Andrey On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 7:21 PM, Jack Howarth <howarth.mailing.lists at gmail.com> wrote: > So you plan on switching and enabling the openmp library defaults as > well as changing the openmp library name at the same time? > Jack >

On 01/16/2012 03:04 AM, Vlad Krylov wrote: > I am interested. I would be grateful for your hints. Great. ;-) > So OpenMP has various constructs such as parallel, barrier, single, > for, etc. And there is at least two libraries to generate OpenMP code: > libgomp and mpc. We want to be independent of specific library. True. > We should create an interface with methods which

Hi; Both -fplugin-arg-dragonegg-emit-ir and -flto works for creating llvm bitcode that can be run with lli. Thanks to Nick for the suggestion. Now, trying to run an OpenMP hello world program. llvm-gcc -fopenmp p_hello.c -flto -S -o p_hello.ll lli p_hello.ll output: LLVM ERROR: Program used external function 'GOMP_parallel_start' which could not be resolved! I am guessing that I have

Jack, Alexey [Bataev] promised to send it for review in a day or two. Then it should be approved by code reviewers, which might take some time. andrey Отправлено с iPad > 12 мая 2015 г., в 21:22, Jack Howarth <howarth.mailing.lists at gmail.com> написал(а): > > Andrey, > Any idea when the patch to enable openmp as the default for > -fopenmp will be posted to

Hi all, I'd like to put in some effort into this too -- perhaps I can write an backend for libgomp while someone else works on a libmpc one. As far as the architecture is concerned, I concur with what has already been discussed: mapping OpenMP constructs to LLVM intrinsics. I think it would make sense to leave out intrinsics for things like "parallel for", "parallel

On Mon, 2012-01-16 at 17:14 +0100, Tobias Grosser wrote: > On 01/16/2012 03:04 AM, Vlad Krylov wrote: > > I am interested. I would be grateful for your hints. > > Great. ;-) > > > So OpenMP has various constructs such as parallel, barrier, single, > > for, etc. And there is at least two libraries to generate OpenMP code: > > libgomp and mpc. We want to be

Bill, Are there any plans to integrate the new openmp support into the llvm/clang 3.5 build process? I have been able to build the current llvm/clang/compiler-rt/openmp svn on Mac OS X 10.9 out of tree with… pushd projects/openmp/runtime make compiler=clang popd and then OPENMP_DIR=`ls projects/openmp/runtime/tmp | grep dyn` pushd

Bill, I have the openmp support in llvm 3.5svn now built on 10.7 using Xcode 4.6.3 and 10.8/10.9 using 5.1.1. The 10.7 build required the hack… perl -pi -e 's|list\(APPEND SANITIZER_COMMON_SUPPORTED_DARWIN_OS iossim\)||g' projects/compiler-rt/CMakeLists.txt to suppress building libclang_rt.asan_iossim_dynamic.dylib. The compiler-rt build now expects the iPhoneSimulator7.0.0.sdk but

Now that we've kick-started the LLVM OpenMP runtime discussion, I want to make a concrete proposal to get a test suite up and running for the LLVM OpenMP runtime. I don't think the current setup as an LLVM subproject is sustainable going forward without some form of testing support, automated or otherwise. The motivation: It's difficult to make changes to the source without some

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: >>

I am involved in a project where one of the aims is to study the effects of different parallelization strategies on efficiency, power consumption etc. The idea is to do automated design space exploration by varying some parameters (e.g. number of tasks) and measuring their effect. Since we are already using LLVM for other purposes, we thought about using LLVM for analysis and then OpenMP for

Hi, Sorry for the hiatus, busy time at my university. :) After a false start and some (hopefully cogent) thought, I am now of the opinion that it will be better to have llvm natively support a somewhat different notion of parallel computation and have the frontend lower OpenMP directives (and possibly other such things) into the same. In short, I propose a intrinsic based approach which hinges

Jack, this is not a problem of this patch, this a problem of your configuration. This patch uses standard clang machinery for locating libiomp5 library. Best regards, Alexey Bataev ============= Software Engineer Intel Compiler Team 13.05.2015 15:59, Jack Howarth пишет: > On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 3:58 PM, <andreybokhanko at gmail.com> wrote: >> Jack, >> >> Alexey

Hello Duncan Sands, >From your reply, what I can understand is that there is no any new OPENMP specific instructions introduced into LLVM IR as a part of DragonEgg project since GCC has already done the job of lowering OpenMP directives into GOMP runtime library calls at LOW GIMPLE IR level. Now, it throws up following questions. 1. Am I correct that DragoEgg should logically supports

I've been getting pqR to work on windows systems, and in the process have discovered various problems with R core versions of R and with Rtools. One is with the implementation of OpenMP in 64-bit Rtools. This problem is in Rtools215 and Rtools33, and presumably all the ones in between. You can see the problem with the following test program: #include <stdio.h> #include <omp.h>