similar to: Webpage to track implementation status of OpenMP features

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 1000 matches similar to: "Webpage to track implementation status of OpenMP features"

2019 Jun 06
2
Webpage to track implementation status of OpenMP features
Yes, I understand. I just don't understand why there are 15 review links. as to the format of the list, we previously had a list of feature for 4.5 (before it was fully supported), we can reuse this old format. Best regards, Alexey Bataev > 6 июня 2019 г., в 19:12, Narayanaswamy, Ravi <ravi.narayanaswamy at intel.com> написал(а): > > Alexey, > Johannes want to put all
2019 Jun 06
2
Webpage to track implementation status of OpenMP features
I don't know where it comes from, currently there is just 2 patches with the new functionality : mapper implementation in clang and in the runtime. Plus the patch for unified memory. Best regards, Alexey Bataev > 6 июня 2019 г., в 19:03, Doerfert, Johannes <jdoerfert at anl.gov> написал(а): > >> On 06/06, Alexey Bataev via llvm-dev wrote: >> Hmm, it is interesting.
2019 Jun 06
2
Webpage to track implementation status of OpenMP features
Hmm, it is interesting. What's missing? and why it is "a lot". It is the status for clang 8.0. There were not too many changes in trunk since last release. Best regards, Alexey Bataev 6 июня 2019 г., в 8:24, Doerfert, Johannes via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> написал(а): Thanks for pointing that one out to me! It's a
2018 Dec 21
2
[OpenMP][AArch64][GlobalISel] AArch64 OMPT tests failing
Curious. I removed -fno-experimental-isel and all of the tests *except* control_tool.c passed. I would have expected all of them to pass if blockaddress works. I'll try to look at some asm and see what's going on. -David Jonas Hahnfeld <hahnjo at hahnjo.de> writes: > Hi David, > > I was the one who originally added the flag to fix failures
2016 Jul 15
3
[PATCH 1/4] Create a simple project to create version.h to run before any other
Avoids trying to create and replace version.h more than once which led to file-locking errors with multicore builds. --- Makefile.am | 1 + win32/VS2015/celt.vcxproj | 48 +++++++++++++++++--------- win32/VS2015/generate_version.vcxproj | 65 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ win32/VS2015/opus.sln | 32 ++++++++++++++++-
2016 Sep 09
2
[PATCH 1/3] appveyor: include opus.dll and opus.exp files if available
Using -i should prevent failing if the files don't exist. --- appveyor.yml | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/appveyor.yml b/appveyor.yml index c85b0b1..ad9c6c0 100644 --- a/appveyor.yml +++ b/appveyor.yml @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ build: verbosity: minimal after_build: -- cmd: 7z a opus.zip win32\VS2015\%PLATFORM%\%CONFIGURATION%\opus.lib include\*.h +- cmd: 7z
2019 Jan 31
2
[RFC] Late (OpenMP) GPU code "SPMD-zation"
<font size=2 face="sans-serif">Hi Johannes,</font><br><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Thank you for the explanation.</font><br><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">I think we need to clarify some details about code generation in Clang today:</font><br><br><font size=2
2018 Dec 20
2
[OpenMP][AArch64][GlobalISel] AArch64 OMPT tests failing
We're seeing OMPT tests fail on AArch64: libomp :: ompt/misc/control_tool.c libomp :: ompt/synchronization/master.c libomp :: ompt/synchronization/taskwait.c The failure mode is similar for all of them: openmp/runtime/test/ompt/misc/control_tool.c:26:17: error: CHECK-NEXT: expected string not found in input // CHECK-NEXT: {{^}}[[MASTER_ID]]:
2019 Jan 22
7
[RFC] Late (OpenMP) GPU code "SPMD-zation"
Where we are ------------ Currently, when we generate OpenMP target offloading code for GPUs, we use sufficient syntactic criteria to decide between two execution modes: 1) SPMD -- All target threads (in an OpenMP team) run all the code. 2) "Guarded" -- The master thread (of an OpenMP team) runs the user code. If an OpenMP distribute region is encountered,
2011 May 31
2
Samba serving sshfs shares: can't delete files
Hello! I have samba share on my sshfs-mounted folder. All works just fine except I can't delete files from sshfs unless they are in 0777 chmodded directory. Even if that files were putted trough smbclient. I can read files, write files (regardless their directory permissions) but not delete them. Here is my share config: [myshare] comment = shre over sshfs path = /home/kli/work/remotes/dev
2018 Aug 27
3
LLVM/Clang/Compiler-RT tarballs version 7.0.0rc2
Yeah, I see. You have an unusual development process seen from my POV. IMHO you can provide the tarballs before the "binaries" are uploaded which means "prebuilt binaries". That could increase the quality of developing when different arch/os maintainers give their OK. But for 7.0.0rc1 I see only prebuilt binaries for... * macOS * FreeBSD10 AMD64 * Windows (32-bit) * Windows
2018 Aug 27
3
LLVM/Clang/Compiler-RT tarballs version 7.0.0rc2
On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 10:30 AM, Jonas Hahnfeld <hahnjo at hahnjo.de> wrote: > On 2018-08-27 09:44, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> >> Yeah, I see. >> You have an unusual development process seen from my POV. > > > GNOME does the same, to pick one example: > https://wiki.gnome.org/ThreePointTwentynine > Tarballs are due on Monday, official release and announcement
2008 Sep 18
2
Source password
Hi! Is it possible to specify different source password for all mounpoints? I tried to found it from docs, but.. If there is some other method to increase security when playing with multiple users and mountpoints, please tell me! - Timo H?kli
2018 Jan 19
3
[Release-testers] [6.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 1 tagged
On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 7:27 PM, Dimitry Andric <dimitry at andric.com> wrote: > On 18 Jan 2018, at 15:03, Jonas Hahnfeld <hahnjo at hahnjo.de> wrote: >> >> Am 2018-01-18 14:55, schrieb Dimitry Andric via llvm-dev: >>> On 17 Jan 2018, at 18:53, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers >>> <release-testers at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >>>> Start
2010 May 28
2
[LLVMdev] Nightly build of CMake with clang 1.1
Hi all, (1st time post, I hope this is on topic...) I notice that CMake is listed as one of the C++ projects that clang can build: <http://clang.llvm.org/cxx_status.html> I thought I'd pass on that I've created a nightly build of CMake that uses clang 1.1 (from llvm 2.7) <http://www.cdash.org/CDash/index.php?project=CMake> (search for 'clang') It does build, but...
2018 Jan 20
0
[Release-testers] [6.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 1 tagged
On 19 Jan 2018, at 17:11, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 7:27 PM, Dimitry Andric <dimitry at andric.com> wrote: >> On 18 Jan 2018, at 15:03, Jonas Hahnfeld <hahnjo at hahnjo.de> wrote: >>> >>> Am 2018-01-18 14:55, schrieb Dimitry Andric via llvm-dev: >>>> On 17 Jan 2018, at 18:53, Hans Wennborg
2018 Jan 18
2
[Release-testers] [6.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 1 tagged
Am 2018-01-18 14:55, schrieb Dimitry Andric via llvm-dev: > On 17 Jan 2018, at 18:53, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers > <release-testers at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> Start your engines; 6.0.0-rc1 was just tagged. >> >> I know there are still open blockers and it's early in the process in >> a way, but I'd like to find out where we are. Please run the
2008 Sep 20
2
Source password
I mean different source password for each mountpoint, no listener password.. chiapas at aktivix.org kirjoitti 20.9.2008 kello 21.36: > 2008/9/18 Timo H?kli <timpuri at kepit.fi>: >> Hi! > > Hi > >> Is it possible to specify different source password for all >> mounpoints? > > A different password for each mountpoint? Sure. > >> I tried to
2018 Mar 05
2
[Release-testers] [6.0.0 Release] The final tag is in
Isn't libc++.so dependent on libc++abi.so? On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 10:30 AM, Jonas Hahnfeld <hahnjo at hahnjo.de> wrote: > From what I can see all of the libraries without RPATH are runtime > libraries that are used by binaries compiled with Clang. I think they don't > have a dependency on other libraries in that directory, so what would be > the advantage of having
2018 Jan 18
0
[Release-testers] [6.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 1 tagged
On 18 Jan 2018, at 15:03, Jonas Hahnfeld <hahnjo at hahnjo.de> wrote: > > Am 2018-01-18 14:55, schrieb Dimitry Andric via llvm-dev: >> On 17 Jan 2018, at 18:53, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers >> <release-testers at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >>> Start your engines; 6.0.0-rc1 was just tagged. >>> I know there are still open blockers and it's early