similar to: [LLVMdev] Clang 3.5 Release Pre-Pre-Pre-Announcement

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 1000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] Clang 3.5 Release Pre-Pre-Pre-Announcement"

2014 May 18
3
[LLVMdev] Clang 3.5 Release Pre-Pre-Pre-Announcement
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
2015 May 01
4
[LLVMdev] libiomp, not libgomp as default library linked with -fopenmp
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
2015 May 02
3
[LLVMdev] libiomp, not libgomp as default library linked with -fopenmp
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,
2015 Apr 30
17
[LLVMdev] 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, 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 (!) clause is not
2015 May 08
2
[LLVMdev] OpenMP 3.1 Implementation Complete
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 10:53 PM, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: > Congratulations! Would you like to add a blurb to the release notes > for the next release? Sure! Will do. Yours, Andrey
2015 May 01
2
[LLVMdev] libiomp, not libgomp as default library linked with -fopenmp
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
2015 May 08
2
[LLVMdev] [Openmp-dev] OpenMP 3.1 Implementation Complete
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
2015 Apr 30
2
[LLVMdev] libiomp, not libgomp as default library linked with -fopenmp
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: >>
2015 May 01
2
[LLVMdev] libiomp, not libgomp as default library linked with -fopenmp
On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 1:57 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 10:46 AM Jack Howarth < > howarth.mailing.lists at gmail.com> wrote: > >> 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 < >>>
2015 May 08
2
[LLVMdev] [Openmp-dev] OpenMP 3.1 Implementation Complete
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 >
2015 Apr 30
2
[LLVMdev] libiomp, not libgomp as default library linked with -fopenmp
On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 9:06 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Andrey Bokhanko" <andreybokhanko at gmail.com> >> To: "cfe-dev" <cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu>, "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>, "Douglas Gregor" >> <dgregor at apple.com>,
2015 May 12
2
[LLVMdev] [Openmp-dev] OpenMP 3.1 Implementation Complete
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
2015 May 01
3
[LLVMdev] libiomp, not libgomp as default library linked with -fopenmp
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
2015 May 13
2
[LLVMdev] [Openmp-dev] OpenMP 3.1 Implementation Complete
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
2015 Sep 04
2
Build R with MKL and ICC
On Wed, 2015-09-02 at 20:49 +0200, arnaud gaboury wrote: > On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 7:35 PM, arnaud gaboury <arnaud.gaboury at gmail.com> wrote: > > After a few days of reading and headache, I finally gave a try at > > building R from source with Intel MKL and ICC. Documentation and posts > > on this topic are rather incomplete, sometime fantasist et do not give > >
2015 Sep 02
4
Build R with MKL and ICC
After a few days of reading and headache, I finally gave a try at building R from source with Intel MKL and ICC. Documentation and posts on this topic are rather incomplete, sometime fantasist et do not give much explanations about configure options. As I am not sure if mine is correct, I would appreciate some advices and hints. OS: Fedora 22 parallel_studio_xe_2016 Hardware : 8 Thread(s) per
2015 Sep 30
1
Build R with MKL and ICC
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 8:11 PM, Nathan Kurz <nate at verse.com> wrote: > Hi Arnaud -- > > I'm glad it's working for you. I'm not sure I understand your final > answer. Are you saying that the version I posted worked for you as > given, or that you had to remove some of the other options? I say it works perfectly when using the single dynamic library (lmkl_rt):
2016 Sep 27
2
(Thin)LTO llvm build
On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 11:17 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> wrote: > Sure, I will try this and let you know. Unfortunately, though, I > have another big work commitment that is going to eat up most of my > time through Thu, although I may be able to find some time to try > it. No worries, if I get around it before you do, I will :). > I think so - what is
2015 Sep 29
2
Build R with MKL and ICC
On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:26 PM, Nathan Kurz <nate at verse.com> wrote: > > As a short and simple approach, I just compiled the current R release > on Ubuntu with ICC and MKL using just this: > > $ tar -xzf R-3.2.2.tar.gz > $ cd R-3.2.2 > $ CC=icc CXX=icpc AR=xiar LD=xild CFLAGS="-g -O3 -xHost" CXXFLAGS="-g > -O3 -xHost" ./configure
2015 May 02
2
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] libiomp, not libgomp as default library linked with -fopenmp
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 >