[Bug libgomp/110842] [14 Regression] Openmp loops with KIND=16 DO loops
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110842 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org Priority|P3 |P4
[Bug libgomp/110842] [14 Regression] Openmp loops with KIND=16 DO loops
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110842 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|needs-bisection | --- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor --- So IIUC nothing to bisect here and so I am removing the tag. Please re-add if I am somehow mistaken.
[Bug libgomp/110842] [14 Regression] Openmp loops with KIND=16 DO loops
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110842 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||openmp --- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus --- > libgomp has no support for loop iterators larger than 64-bit unsigned, and I > believe in OpenMP it is implementation defined which iterator type is used. "The iterations of some number of associated loops can be collapsed into one larger iteration space that is called the logical iteration space. The particular integer type used to compute the iteration count for the collapsed loop is implementation defined, but its bit precision must be at least that of3 the widest type that the implementation would use for the iteration count of each loop if it was the only associated loop." This sounds a bit as if it should be supported – but at the end it is implementation defined. However, I think it makes sense to document it as implementation defined in libomp.texi – and to output a compile time error if we know that something is not implemented. * * * For use the largest type used in the loop, see also OG13-only patch (originally for OG-12): commit https://gcc.gnu.org/g:90d8139007c69657325c5c187b0d47f463b455d1 "openmp: Scale type precision of collapsed iterator variable" But that won't help if libgomp does not support the integer type. * * * > C/C++ OpenMP loops with __int128 or unsigned __int128 iterator will not work > either (nor with _BitInt(575) or similar). ... and we likely don't want to support _BitInt iterators!
[Bug libgomp/110842] [14 Regression] Openmp loops with KIND=16 DO loops
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110842 --- Comment #3 from Thomas Koenig --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2) > Why a regression? It worked before (if only by accident), hence I put "Regression" there. > libgomp has no support for loop iterators larger than 64-bit unsigned, and I > believe in OpenMP it is implementation defined which iterator type is used. > C/C++ OpenMP loops with __int128 or unsigned __int128 iterator will not work > either (nor with _BitInt(575) or similar). If it is illegal, then the best way to do this would probably be an error message instead of silent wrong code.
[Bug libgomp/110842] [14 Regression] Openmp loops with KIND=16 DO loops
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110842 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- Why a regression? libgomp has no support for loop iterators larger than 64-bit unsigned, and I believe in OpenMP it is implementation defined which iterator type is used. C/C++ OpenMP loops with __int128 or unsigned __int128 iterator will not work either (nor with _BitInt(575) or similar).
[Bug libgomp/110842] [14 Regression] Openmp loops with KIND=16 DO loops
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110842 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |14.0 Keywords||needs-bisection, wrong-code --- Comment #1 from Thomas Koenig --- I just tested trunk, this might have happened earlier.
