similar to: [LLVMdev] llvm and openmp

Hi Karthik, > I am new to llvm. Does llvm has support for openmp directives like #pragma > openmp threadprivate(var)? LLVM has no special support for openmp. The LLVM front-ends that support openmp, namely llvm-gcc and dragonegg, lower openmp constructs down to library calls the same way GCC does. This is no coincidence: both of those front-ends are based on GCC and just let the GCC

Not to distract, but the word, `procedurization' is not an English word. It's just leaping out at me when it is either procedure(s) (noun) or proceduralize (verb). Even processes would make sense. I couldn't help myself because the word was distracting. - Marc P.S. Not that my vote counts, but I'm more in the camp of Hal whose approach to tackling the parallelization

Jack, Could you, please, submit a bug report? -- including steps to reproduce (where you got imageMagick sources, how exactly you compiled them, etc) Andrey On 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,

Andrey, While I think that it will be relatively easy to have the intrinsics serve as code-motion barriers for other code that might be threads sensitive (like other external function calls), we would need to think through exactly how this would work. The easiest thing would be to make the intrinsics have having unmodeled side effects, although we might want to do something more intelligent.

Problem LLVM's memory model for NonAtomic accesses is generally fairly weak, but explicitly disallows inserting stores that didn't occur in the original program.  This is required for any potentially shared location, but is overkill for any memory location which is provably only accessed by a single thread. My particular motivating example is a single thread private field in our

Hi All, We'd like to make a proposal for OpenMP representation in LLVM IR. Our goal is to reach an agreement in the community on a simple, complete and extensible representation of OpenMP language constructs in LLVM IR. Hopefully, this would serve as a common ground and would enable further development of OpenMP support both in Clang and LLVM compiler toolchain. We seek feedback on the

LLVM Weekly - #46, Nov 17th 2014 ================================ If you prefer, you can read a HTML version of this email at <http://llvmweekly.org/issue/46>. Welcome to the forty-sixth issue of LLVM Weekly, a weekly newsletter (published every Monday) covering developments in LLVM, Clang, and related projects. LLVM Weekly is brought to you by [Alex Bradbury](http://asbradbury.org).

Andrey, I am very glad to see that you're interested in working on this! I have a few comments: As you may know, this is the third such proposal over the past two months, one by me (http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2012-August/052472.html) and the other, based somewhat on mine, by Sanjoy (http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2012-September/053798.html) In order for your

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. =] > No, sorry. libgomp doesn't

Hello, I'd like to see support in clang/LLVM for multi-core parallelism, especially support for OpenMP. I think that the best way to do this is by designing an LLVM-based API (metadata and intrinsics) for expressing parallelism constructs, and having clang lower OpenMP code to that API. This will allow maximal preservation of optimization capabilities including target-specific lowering. What

def test_check_for_validity post=County.new(:name=>"myname",:description=>"mydesc") assert post.save end above is the method and when i run unit test it is saying as 1) Failure: test_check_for_validity(CountyTest) [/test/unit/county_test.rb:10]: <false> is not true. what does it say i cannot under stand please help -- Karthik.k Mobile -

Hi, I am unable to build the letor module. I am generating the configure file using autoconf. The configure file generated is throwing the error ./configure: line 2057: syntax error near unexpected token `1.10.1' ./configure: line 2057: `AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE(1.10.1 -Wportability tar-ustar)` I am not too sure what to do with this. Need help with this. Thank You Regards Karthik On Mon, Sep 29,

hi this is my htnl <html> <head> <%= javascript_include_tag :defaults %> </head> <body> <%= form_tag nil, { :id => ''search_form'' } %> <%= text_field ''recipe'', ''name'' %> <%= end_form_tag %> <div id="recipe"> </div> <%= observe_form :search_form, :frequency =>

Hi, I have started getting a hang of the xapian codebase. I think I would like to try my hands on the letor module of xapian. Could you please suggest some free data set for the training and testing of letor features. I am not able to get the INEX data set from anywhere (the one mentioned by parth gupta in his GSOC 2011 projecct. Regards Karthik On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 4:23 PM, Olly Betts

On 02/28/14 04:20 AM, Rick Mann wrote: > Tangentially related, I have a question: > > I don't know, well, anything about how OpenMP is implemented. But does it make sense to use Grand Central Dispatch on platforms that support it (instead of, I assume, pthreads)? We played with implementing OpenMP 3.x tasks on top of libdispatch and while we got it to work - there was some

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

Hi all, I am going to build a Pass/es that verify OpenMP code. When we compile an OpenMP program we give the option “-fopenmp” to clang. In this way the LLVM IR code obtained will reflect also the “#pragma” keywords in the code, let’s call it "OpenMP LLVM IR". In my Pass/es before obtaining the OpenMP LLVM IR, I need to do some operation in the LLVM IR, that is the IR code obtained

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Simone Atzeni" <simone.at at gmail.com> > To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu, cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu, openmp-dev at dcs-maillist2.engr.illinois.edu > Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 3:42:03 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] [cfe-dev][Openmp-dev] Provide LLVM IR and OpenMP LLVM IR as input

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Simone Atzeni" <simone.at at gmail.com> > To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu, cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu, openmp-dev at dcs-maillist2.engr.illinois.edu > Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 3:17:07 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] [cfe-dev][Openmp-dev] Provide LLVM IR and OpenMP LLVM IR as input in a Pass > > > > Hi all, > I am going

On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 3:36 PM, Anatoliy Dmytriyev <tolid at tolid.eu.org> wrote: > Hi Karthik, > > > Thanks a lot for the explanation. > > Does it mean a distributed volume health can be checked only by "gluster > volume status " command? > Yes. I am not aware of any other command which can give the status of plain distribute volume which is similar to