On Thu, 9 Jun 2016, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> > (define_expand "restore_stack_block"
> >[(match_operand 0 "register_operand" "")
> > (match_operand 1 "register_operand" "")]
>
> you've not addressed my previous comments about this.
To be clear -- do you mean that "restore_stack_block"
On 06/02/16 17:22, Alexander Monakov wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2016, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
It seems like we should reject the combination of -msoft-stack -fopenacc?
Possibly; the doc text makes it explicit that the option is exposed only for
the purpose of testing the compiler, anyway.
It is
On Wed, 25 May 2016, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> > > It seems like we should reject the combination of -msoft-stack -fopenacc?
> >
> > Possibly; the doc text makes it explicit that the option is exposed only for
> > the purpose of testing the compiler, anyway.
>
> It is always best to prevent the
On 05/24/16 17:29, Alexander Monakov wrote:
On Fri, 20 May 2016, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
ah, that's much more understandable, thanks. Presumably this doesn't
support worker-single mode (in OpenACC parlance, I don't know what the OpenMP
version of that is?)
I don't see why you have concerns.
On Fri, 20 May 2016, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> ah, that's much more understandable, thanks. Presumably this doesn't
> support worker-single mode (in OpenACC parlance, I don't know what the OpenMP
> version of that is?)
I don't see why you have concerns. In OpenMP, what OpenACC calls
On 05/20/16 11:09, Alexander Monakov wrote:
This patch implements '-msoft-stack' code generation variant for NVPTX. The
goal is to avoid relying on '.local' memory space for placement of automatic
data, and instead have an explicitely-maintained stack pointer (which can be
set up to point to
On 05/20/2016 09:09 AM, Alexander Monakov wrote:
diff --git a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
index d281975..f0331e2 100644
--- a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
+++ b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
@@ -19341,6 +19341,18 @@ offloading execution.
Apply partitioned execution optimizations. This is the
On Thu, 21 Apr 2016, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> On 04/20/16 12:59, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> > This patch implements per-warp compiler-defined stacks under -msoft-stack
> > option, and implements alloca on top of that. In a few obvious places,
> > changes from -muniform-simt patch are present in
On 04/20/16 12:59, Alexander Monakov wrote:
This patch implements per-warp compiler-defined stacks under -msoft-stack
option, and implements alloca on top of that. In a few obvious places,
changes from -muniform-simt patch are present in the hunks.
It'd be better to not mix fragments of
This patch implements per-warp compiler-defined stacks under -msoft-stack
option, and implements alloca on top of that. In a few obvious places,
changes from -muniform-simt patch are present in the hunks.
Previously posted here:
[PATCH] nvptx: implement automatic storage in custom stacks
10 matches
Mail list logo
