AndreyChurbanov added inline comments.
================
Comment at: openmp/runtime/src/kmp_taskdeps.cpp:344-346
+ // link node as successor of all nodes in the prev_set if any
+ npredecessors +=
+ __kmp_depnode_link_successor(gtid, thread, task, node, prev_set);
----------------
protze.joachim wrote:
> If I understand this code right, this has O(n^2) complexity for two sets of
> size n?
>
> Consider:
> ```
> for (int i=0; i<n; i++) {
> #pragma omp task depend(in:A)
> work(A,i);
> }
> for (int i=0; i<n; i++) {
> #pragma omp task depend(inoutset:A)
> work(A,i);
> }
> ```
> All n tasks in the first loop would be predecessor for each of the tasks in
> the second loop. This will also result in n^2 releases/notifications.
>
>
> I'd suggest to model the dependencies like:
> ```
> for (int i=0; i<n; i++) {
> #pragma omp task depend(in:A)
> work(A,i);
> }
> #pragma omp taskwait depend(inout:A) nowait
> for (int i=0; i<n; i++) {
> #pragma omp task depend(inoutset:A)
> work(A,i);
> }
> ```
> I.e., add a dummy dependency node between the two sets, which has n
> predecessors and n successors. You probably understand the depnode code
> better, than I do, but I think you would only need to add some code in line
> 357, where `last_set` is moved to `prev_set`.
> This dummy node would reduce linking and releasing complexity to O(n).
This could be a separate research project. Because such change may cause
performance regressions on some real codes, so it needs thorough investigation.
I mean insertion of an auxiliary dummy node into dependency graph is
definitely an overhead, which may or may not be overridden by reduction in
number of edges in the graph. Or it can be made optional optimization under an
external control, if there is a significant gain in some particular case.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D97085/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D97085
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
