On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 6:10 PM, Iyer, Balaji V balaji.v.i...@intel.com wrote:
I think David is getting the correct output but just that dg-error is not
catching it correctly.
What version of expect are you using?
Fedora 18 apparently has 5.45, others are using 5.44, and AIX 7.1
provides
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 6:10 PM, Iyer, Balaji V balaji.v.i...@intel.com wrote:
I think David is getting the correct output but just that dg-error is not
catching it correctly.
Is there an updated Tcl or runtest pre-req?
- David
: [PING]RE: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation for C patch
Balaji,
Thanks for this new feature and I am relieved that so much of it works
successfully on PowerLinux and AIX.
I know that you have received a deluge of reports of issues with the cilkplus
support that you slowly are working
; 'Joseph S.
Myers'; gcc-patches
Subject: RE: [PING]RE: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation for C patch
Balaji,
Thanks for this new feature and I am relieved that so much of it works
successfully on PowerLinux and AIX.
I know that you have received a deluge of reports of issues with the cilkplus
support
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 03:02:27PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
error: __sec_reduce_min_ind or __sec_reduce_max_ind cannot have arrays
with dimension greater than 1
Same as above for this also.
Not sure about this one. It's possible (I'd have to sit down with
dg.exp for a while) that it's
-Original Message-
From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 5:02 PM
To: Iyer, Balaji V
Cc: David Edelsohn; Richard Henderson; Jakub Jelinek; Aldy Hernandez; 'Joseph
S. Myers'; gcc-patches
Subject: Re: [PING]RE: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation for C
. Myers'; 'gcc-patches'
Subject: Re: [PING]RE: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation for C patch
On 05/28/2013 11:44 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
i Richard, Jakub et al..
I think I have fixed everything requested by RTH
(http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-05/msg01400.html). I think I have
Rainer Orth r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de writes:
Iyer, Balaji V balaji.v.i...@intel.com writes:
[...]
This patch is committed to trunk at revision 199389.
... and immediately broke Solaris bootstrap, cf. PR bootstrap/57450.
Fixed implementing Richard's suggestion from the PR. Bootstrapped
Balaji,
Thanks for this new feature and I am relieved that so much of it works
successfully on PowerLinux and AIX.
I know that you have received a deluge of reports of issues with the
cilkplus support that you slowly are working through. I am seeing the
following new testsuite failures on AIX:
: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 2:52 PM
To: Iyer, Balaji V
Cc: Jakub Jelinek; Aldy Hernandez; Jeff Law; 'Joseph S. Myers';
'gcc-patches'
Subject: Re: [PING]RE: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation for C patch
On 05/28/2013 11:44 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
i Richard, Jakub et al..
I think I have fixed
On 05/24/13 13:43, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
Hi Jakub,
I moved all the tests from gcc.dg/cilk-plus/AN directory to
c-c++-common/cilk-plus/AN directory. The gcc.dg/cilk-plus directory just
contains cilk-plus.exp script, which will handle all the tests in cilk-plus,
not just array notation
...@redhat.com; 'Joseph S. Myers'; 'gcc-patches'
Subject: Re: [PING]RE: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation for C patch
On 05/24/13 13:43, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
Hi Jakub,
I moved all the tests from gcc.dg/cilk-plus/AN directory to c-c++-
common/cilk-plus/AN directory. The gcc.dg/cilk-plus
On 05/28/13 11:49, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
At present, I did not have a g++.dg/cilk-plus/cilk-plus.exp script,
thus C++ compiler does not execute these tests.
Ah, I see. Perfect.
. Myers';
'gcc-patches'
Subject: Re: [PING]RE: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation for C patch
On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 11:37:32AM -0500, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
I moved all the tests from gcc.dg/cilk-plus/AN directory to c-c++-
common/cilk-plus/AN directory. The gcc.dg/cilk-plus directory just
On 05/28/2013 11:44 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
i Richard, Jakub et al..
I think I have fixed everything requested by RTH
(http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-05/msg01400.html). I think I have
also moved the tests in the correct place Jakub requested. It is passing all
the correct
: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation for C patch
On 05/28/2013 11:44 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
i Richard, Jakub et al..
I think I have fixed everything requested by RTH
(http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-05/msg01400.html). I think I have
also moved the tests in the correct place
; Aldy Hernandez; Jeff Law; 'Joseph S. Myers'; 'gcc-patches'
Subject: Re: [PING]RE: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation for C patch
On 05/28/2013 11:44 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
i Richard, Jakub et al..
I think I have fixed everything requested by RTH
(http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-05
: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 2:52 PM
To: Iyer, Balaji V
Cc: Jakub Jelinek; Aldy Hernandez; Jeff Law; 'Joseph S. Myers';
'gcc-patches'
Subject: Re: [PING]RE: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation for C patch
On 05/28/2013 11:44 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
i Richard, Jakub et al..
I think I have fixed
-Original Message-
From: H.J. Lu [mailto:hjl.to...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 8:48 PM
To: Iyer, Balaji V
Cc: Richard Henderson; Jakub Jelinek; Aldy Hernandez; Jeff Law; Joseph S.
Myers; gcc-patches
Subject: Re: [PING]RE: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation for C patch
On 05/23/2013 06:42 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
I got all your responses and, if I remove the compile, execute and
errors directories but keep cilk-plus and array notation, maybe even
abbreviate array notation to an, (in future cilk keywords to ck,
pragma simd to ps and elemental function to
; Richard Henderson; 'Joseph S. Myers'; 'gcc-
patches'
Subject: Re: [PING]RE: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation for C patch
On 05/23/2013 06:42 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
I got all your responses and, if I remove the compile, execute and
errors directories but keep cilk-plus and array notation
Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 3:23 PM
To: Jakub Jelinek
Cc: Iyer, Balaji V; Richard Henderson; 'Joseph S. Myers'; 'gcc-patches'
Subject: Re: [PING]RE: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation for C patch
On 05/23/13 14:03, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 06:27:04PM +, Iyer, Balaji V
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 05:52:11PM +, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
* gcc.dg/cilk-plus/AN/array_test1.c: New test.
...
* gcc.dg/cilk-plus/AN/cilkplus_AN_c.exp: New script.
Ok, I guess I can live with /AN/ extra level, but can you please
move it still to c-c++-common/cilk-plus/AN/ for
: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation for C patch
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 05:52:11PM +, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
* gcc.dg/cilk-plus/AN/array_test1.c: New test.
...
* gcc.dg/cilk-plus/AN/cilkplus_AN_c.exp: New script.
Ok, I guess I can live with /AN/ extra level, but can you please
. I hope that's OK.
-Original Message-
From: Richard Henderson [mailto:r...@redhat.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 1:34 PM
To: Iyer, Balaji V
Cc: 'Joseph S. Myers'; 'Aldy Hernandez'; 'gcc-patches'
Subject: Re: [PING]RE: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation for C patch
On 2013-05-22
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 06:27:04PM +, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
2013-05-23 Balaji V. Iyer balaji.v.i...@intel.com
* gcc.dg/cilk-plus/array_notation/compile/array_test2.c: New test.
I have concerns about the test locations, to me this looks way too deep
tree,
On 05/23/13 14:03, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 06:27:04PM +, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
2013-05-23 Balaji V. Iyer balaji.v.i...@intel.com
* gcc.dg/cilk-plus/array_notation/compile/array_test2.c: New test.
I have concerns about the test
On 05/23/2013 11:27 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
Hello Richard et al.,
Attached, please find a fixed patch. I have done the following changes:
1. Used the c_finish_loop (...) function instead of building the loop myself
2. Got rid of ARRAY_NOTATION_TYPE and just used TREE_TYPE ().
It
-Original Message-
From: Jakub Jelinek [mailto:ja...@redhat.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 3:04 PM
To: Iyer, Balaji V
Cc: Richard Henderson; 'Joseph S. Myers'; 'Aldy Hernandez'; 'gcc-patches'
Subject: Re: [PING]RE: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation for C patch
On Thu, May 23
On 05/23/2013 02:38 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
Hi Jakub Aldy, There are a couple reasons why I picked this
hierarchy. I looked at gcc-c-torture directory and it has compile,
execute etc. This is why I had execute, compile and errors directory.
Also, we are planning to have some hybrid tests
On Wed, 22 May 2013, Jeff Law wrote:
On 05/22/2013 03:58 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
Regarding commonality between OpenMP and Cilk, note also the new C
Parallel Language Extensions WG14 study group chaired by Clark Nelson and
aiming to propose a standard set of C extensions for parallel
-Original Message-
From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 4:52 PM
To: Iyer, Balaji V
Cc: Jakub Jelinek; Richard Henderson; 'Joseph S. Myers'; 'Aldy Hernandez';
'gcc-
patches'
Subject: Re: [PING]RE: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation for C patch
On May 23, 2013, at 2:08 PM, Iyer, Balaji V balaji.v.i...@intel.com wrote:
If I put things in c-c++-common, how do I test the code with different flags
(I didn't see any .exp file there)? For example, how can I test if it works
with -O2 and then have another test for -O2 -g etc.? Do I just
'; 'gcc-patches'
Subject: Re: [PING]RE: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation for C patch
On 05/23/13 14:03, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 06:27:04PM +, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
2013-05-23 Balaji V. Iyer balaji.v.i...@intel.com
* gcc.dg/cilk
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 07:57:10PM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
+ /* This will create the if statement label. */
+ if_stmt_label[ii] = build_decl (location, LABEL_DECL, NULL_TREE,
+ void_type_node);
+ DECL_CONTEXT (if_stmt_label[ii]) =
-patches'
Subject: Re: [PING]RE: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation for C patch
Let me start by saying that I think the patch is generally ok, especially
considering the advice that's already been given. That said...
+++ b/gcc/c/c-array-notation.c
@@ -0,0 +1,3121 @@
So, like, are we going
On 2013-05-21 23:15, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Furthermore, do you want to generate just normal loop out of it, or
shouldn't we generate a #pragma omp simd loop out of it instead?
Haven't read the spec if array notation guarantees lack of forward/backward
loop dependencies and what are the
: [PING]RE: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation for C patch
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 07:57:10PM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
+ /* This will create the if statement label. */
+ if_stmt_label[ii] = build_decl (location, LABEL_DECL, NULL_TREE
-Original Message-
From: Richard Henderson [mailto:r...@redhat.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 11:30 AM
To: Jakub Jelinek
Cc: Iyer, Balaji V; 'Joseph S. Myers'; 'Aldy Hernandez'; 'gcc-patches'
Subject: Re: [PING]RE: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation for C patch
On 2013-05-21
On 05/22/2013 09:37 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
Furthermore, do you want to generate just normal loop out of it, or
shouldn't we generate a #pragma omp simd loop out of it instead?
Haven't read the spec if array notation guarantees lack of
forward/backward loop dependencies and what are the
On 2013-05-22 08:18, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
The overall function names are same, but the components inside it function
differs greatly from C and C++. For example, in C++ I can't use
build_modify_expr, but build_x_modify_expr. Also, I need to handle
overloaded function types, and that requires
: [PING]RE: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation for C patch
On 05/22/2013 09:37 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
Furthermore, do you want to generate just normal loop out of it, or
shouldn't we generate a #pragma omp simd loop out of it instead?
Haven't read the spec if array notation guarantees lack
On 05/22/2013 01:13 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
Hi Jeff, Yes, converting the array notation expansion to #pragma simd
(or #pragma omp simd) trees will be beneficial performance wise. But,
it will require semi-significant re-write and this can destabilize a
currently stable implementation. IMHO,
-Original Message-
From: Richard Henderson [mailto:r...@redhat.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 1:34 PM
To: Iyer, Balaji V
Cc: 'Joseph S. Myers'; 'Aldy Hernandez'; 'gcc-patches'
Subject: Re: [PING]RE: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation for C patch
On 2013-05-22 08:18, Iyer
On Wed, 22 May 2013, Jeff Law wrote:
So if we can represent array notation as an OpenMP SIMD loop and re-use the
OpenMP code generation, that's a significant win. I realize the OpenMP SIMD
stuff is still in-progress, but from a design standpoint we'd like to separate
out the front-end issues
On 05/22/2013 02:25 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
Yes, they are both the same. A while back, I found a couple corner cases
where the TREE_TYPE of the array notations inside __sec_reduce functions
that was getting changed. This is a storage location that will be untouched
so that I can get the
-Original Message-
From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Richard Henderson
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 6:18 PM
To: Iyer, Balaji V
Cc: 'Joseph S. Myers'; 'Aldy Hernandez'; 'gcc-patches'
Subject: Re: [PING]RE: [patch] cilkplus
On 05/22/2013 03:58 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
Regarding commonality between OpenMP and Cilk, note also the new C
Parallel Language Extensions WG14 study group chaired by Clark Nelson and
aiming to propose a standard set of C extensions for parallel programming,
announced yesterday on the WG14
-Original Message-
From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 10:11 PM
To: Joseph S. Myers
Cc: Iyer, Balaji V; Jakub Jelinek; Richard Henderson; 'Aldy Hernandez'; 'gcc-
patches'
Subject: Re: [PING]RE: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation for C patch
On 05
-Original Message-
From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 10:11 PM
To: Joseph S. Myers
Cc: Iyer, Balaji V; Jakub Jelinek; Richard Henderson; 'Aldy Hernandez'; 'gcc-
patches'
Subject: Re: [PING]RE: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation for C patch
On 05
Let me start by saying that I think the patch is generally ok, especially
considering the advice that's already been given. That said...
+++ b/gcc/c/c-array-notation.c
@@ -0,0 +1,3121 @@
So, like, are we going to need to replicate 3000 lines to add array notation to
c++ too? How much of
Can someone please review this patch for us?
Thanks,
Balaji V. Iyer.
-Original Message-
From: Iyer, Balaji V
Sent: Monday, May 06, 2013 11:32 AM
To: Joseph S. Myers
Cc: 'Aldy Hernandez'; 'gcc-patches'
Subject: RE: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation for C patch
Attached, please
Hi Joseph et al.,
Did you all get a chance to look at this patch?
Thanks,
Balaji V. Iyer.
-Original Message-
From: Iyer, Balaji V
Sent: Monday, April 08, 2013 9:56 AM
To: 'Joseph Myers'; 'Aldy Hernandez'
Cc: 'gcc-patches'
Subject: [PING]RE: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation
Hello Joseph,
Did you get a chance to look at this patch?
Thanks,
Balaji V. Iyer.
-Original Message-
From: Iyer, Balaji V
Sent: Friday, March 29, 2013 5:58 PM
To: 'Joseph Myers'; 'Aldy Hernandez'
Cc: 'gcc-patches'
Subject: RE: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation for C patch
54 matches
Mail list logo
