Re: My current idea for improving libgomp

2011-05-03 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 11:27:15AM +0900, Sho Nakatani wrote: > In my opinion, even tied task needs user-level thread for scheduling. I don't think so. Of course you need some data structure for each task, but having to allocate (even if from cache) a separate stack for each task is a significant

Re: My current idea for improving libgomp

2011-05-02 Thread Sho Nakatani
Hi, > First of all, if you haven't started with the FSF assignment paperwork, > please do so, it takes a while. See http://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html I've already started it. Thanks. > For #pragma omp parallel and tied tasks you just want user-level == > kernel-level thread as implemented in l

Re: My current idea for improving libgomp

2011-05-01 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Mon, May 02, 2011 at 09:28:52AM +0900, Sho Nakatani wrote: > I'm trying to make better libgomp implementation of task construct in > a GSoC project. First of all, if you haven't started with the FSF assignment paperwork, please do so, it takes a while. See http://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html >

Re: My current idea for improving libgomp

2011-05-01 Thread Sho Nakatani
Hi, I'm trying to make better libgomp implementation of task construct in a GSoC project. After reading several paper around OpenMP task feature, several questions occurred to me. I appreciate all of your answers. Even a few comments will do. * Tell me good reference of OpenMP standards. What is

Re: My current idea for improving libgomp

2011-04-30 Thread Sho Nakatani
Hello again Andreas, (I just forgot to Cc to GCC ML, so resending this email) > Right, start with distributing the queues and then think about load > balancing. OK. > I would say don't worry too much about cut-offs at this point. Finding a > good cut-off strategy that works without drawbacks is

Re: My current idea for improving libgomp

2011-04-30 Thread Andreas Prell
Hey Sho, > I totally agree with this point. > Currently, I'm planning to implement tied task using breath-first > scheduler wrote in > section 3.1 of "Evaluation of OpenMP Task Scheduling Strategies" by Nanos > Group. > http://www.sarc-ip.org/files/null/Workshop/1234128788173__TSchedStrat-iwomp08

Re: My current idea for improving libgomp

2011-04-29 Thread Sho Nakatani
Hi Andreas, Thank you for your comments. > I think the biggest problem in libgomp is that tasks are stored in a > single queue. This may work for a few threads or for long-running tasks, > but certainly not for 48 threads. In fact, contention on the queue can > grow so high that performance start

Re: My current idea for improving libgomp

2011-04-29 Thread Andreas Prell
Hi Sho, I just came across your project and would like to add a few comments. I think the biggest problem in libgomp is that tasks are stored in a single queue. This may work for a few threads or for long-running tasks, but certainly not for 48 threads. In fact, contention on the queue can grow s

My current idea for improving libgomp

2011-04-27 Thread Sho Nakatani
Hi, I'm Sho Nakatani, accepted by Google Summer of Code 2011. I'm trying to add speed-up to libgomp, an OpenMP implementaion in GCC. As GSoC project, I'll focus on OpenMP `task' directive (especially `tied task'). Around the beginning of April, some members here told me that I can migrate the Ope