https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104952
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tom de Vries :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:093cdadbce30ce2d36846a05d979b8afc2eff618
commit r12-7702-g093cdadbce30ce2d36846a05d979b8afc2eff618
Author: Tom de Vries
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104952
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104952
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Comment on attachment 52647
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52647
Tentative patch with test-cases, rationale and changelog
Please change arr[5] = 1; to arr[5] = 42; or so also to test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104952
--- Comment #9 from Tom de Vries ---
Created attachment 52647
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52647=edit
Tentative patch with test-cases, rationale and changelog
I'll put this through testing, and submit if no problems
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104952
--- Comment #8 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
> And yes, #c1 is valid.
Thanks for confirming.
> But would be nice to have similar test with && and
> initial result = 2; and arr[] say { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104952
--- Comment #7 from Tom de Vries ---
Alternative fix that doesn't require fiddling with the 'code' var:
...
diff --git a/gcc/omp-low.cc b/gcc/omp-low.cc
index d932d74cb03..d0ddd4a6142 100644
--- a/gcc/omp-low.cc
+++ b/gcc/omp-low.cc
@@ -6734,7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104952
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
And yes, #c1 is valid. But would be nice to have similar test with && and
initial result = 2; and arr[] say { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, ..., 32 } and test
result is 1 at the end to make sure we don't actually
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104952
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Note, I guess this is related to PR94366 and r12-438-g1580fc764423bf89e9b which
was fixing it for non-SIMT and quite possibly left out the SIMT stuff out.
Using the TRUTH_{AND,OR}_EXPR instead of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104952
--- Comment #4 from Tom de Vries ---
This fixes it:
...
diff --git a/gcc/omp-low.cc b/gcc/omp-low.cc
index d932d74cb03..f2ac8f98e32 100644
--- a/gcc/omp-low.cc
+++ b/gcc/omp-low.cc
@@ -6734,7 +6734,21 @@ lower_rec_input_clauses (tree clauses,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104952
--- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries ---
Hmm, that seems to be actually due to:
...
if (sctx.is_simt)
{
if (!simt_lane)
simt_lane = create_tmp_var
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104952
--- Comment #2 from Tom de Vries ---
I think the problem can be seen already at omp-lower, in the body of the
butterfly loop.
Let's first look at what we have if we use reduction op '|':
...
D.2173 = .GOMP_SIMT_VF ();
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104952
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||openmp
--- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries
12 matches
Mail list logo
