Re: FW: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 17:15:11 +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > On Mon, 28 Mar 2016 19:40:22 +0300, Ilya Verbin wrote: > > Do you plan to commit this patch? :) > > Well, I'm also still waiting for you guys to merge (via the upstream > Intel sources repository) my GNU Hurd

Re: FW: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C

Hi! On Mon, 28 Mar 2016 19:40:22 +0300, Ilya Verbin wrote: > Do you plan to commit this patch? :) Well, I'm also still waiting for you guys to merge (via the upstream Intel sources repository) my GNU Hurd portability patches; submitted to GCC in

Re: FW: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C

Hi Thomas! Do you plan to commit this patch? :) On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 09:24:40 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On 09/29/14 08:26, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > >On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 13:58:31 +, "Tannenbaum, Barry M" > > wrote: > >>In a nutshell, add the following code to

RE: FW: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C

] Sent: Monday, September 22, 2014 9:56 AM To: Iyer, Balaji V Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: FW: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C Hi! On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 21:30:49 +, Iyer, Balaji V balaji.v.i...@intel.com wrote: --- /dev/null +++ gcc/testsuite/c-c

RE: FW: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C

...@codesourcery.com] Sent: Monday, September 29, 2014 6:54 AM To: Tannenbaum, Barry M; Iyer, Balaji V; Zamyatin, Igor Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: RE: FW: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C Hi! On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 19:21:33 +, Tannenbaum, Barry M barry.m.tannenb

RE: FW: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C

Hi! On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 13:58:31 +, Tannenbaum, Barry M barry.m.tannenb...@intel.com wrote: In a nutshell, add the following code to main() before the call to f3(): int status = __cilkrts_set_param(nworkers, 2); if (0 != status) { // Failed to set the number of Cilk

RE: FW: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C

...@codesourcery.com] Sent: Monday, September 29, 2014 10:27 AM To: Tannenbaum, Barry M; Iyer, Balaji V; Zamyatin, Igor Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: RE: FW: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C Hi! On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 13:58:31 +, Tannenbaum, Barry M barry.m.tannenb

Re: FW: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C

On 09/29/14 08:26, Thomas Schwinge wrote: Hi! On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 13:58:31 +, Tannenbaum, Barry M barry.m.tannenb...@intel.com wrote: In a nutshell, add the following code to main() before the call to f3(): int status = __cilkrts_set_param(nworkers, 2); if (0 != status) {

Re: FW: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C

Hi! On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 21:30:49 +, Iyer, Balaji V balaji.v.i...@intel.com wrote: --- /dev/null +++ gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/spawning_arg.c @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@ +/* { dg-do run { target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* arm*-*-* } } } */ +/* { dg-options -fcilkplus } */ +/* {

RE: FW: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C

@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: FW: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C Hi! On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 21:30:49 +, Iyer, Balaji V balaji.v.i...@intel.com wrote: --- /dev/null +++ gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/spawning_arg.c @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@ +/* { dg-do run { target { i?86

Re: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++

Iyer, Balaji V balaji.v.i...@intel.com writes: diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cilk-plus/cilk-plus.exp b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cilk-plus/cilk-plus.exp index 707d17e..36c8111 100644 --- a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cilk-plus/cilk-plus.exp +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cilk-plus/cilk-plus.exp @@

Re: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++

On 12/10/2013 06:03 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: Fixed patch and ChangeLog entries are attached. Is it Ok to install? OK. Jason

Re: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++

On 12/05/2013 11:38 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: used the init_p value that comes out of stabilize_expr I guess you didn't look at the patch I sent you... Since you've fixed extract_free_variables, you don't need call_to_lambda_fn_p at all, or to call stabilize_expr. Why do you need to move

Re: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++

On 12/04/2013 02:45 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: + error_at (input_location, _Cilk_sync cannot be used without enabling + Cilk Plus); + cp_lexer_consume_token (parser-lexer); + if (parser-in_statement IN_CILK_SPAWN) + parser-in_statement = parser-in_statement

RE: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++

-Original Message- From: Jason Merrill [mailto:ja...@redhat.com] Sent: Thursday, December 5, 2013 4:00 PM To: Iyer, Balaji V; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Jeff Law Subject: Re: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++ On 12/04/2013 02:45 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: + error_at

Re: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++

On 12/03/2013 07:08 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: In install_body_with_frame_cleanup for C++, I am using trees such as TRY_CATCH_EXPR and am using a function from the cp/except.c. I didn't know how to bring them to c-family. I had in mind that the declaration would be in c-common.h, but each

RE: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++

-Original Message- From: Jason Merrill [mailto:ja...@redhat.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 4, 2013 5:39 PM To: Iyer, Balaji V; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Jeff Law Subject: Re: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++ On 12/03/2013 07:08 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote

Re: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++

On 12/04/2013 05:42 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: I had in mind that the declaration would be in c-common.h, but each front end would have a different definition in the front end directory, kind of like how all front ends need to define convert. I didn't know it was an OK thing to do. I think

RE: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++

case CILK_SPAWN_STMT: gcc_assert (fn_contains_cilk_spawn_p (cfun) lang_hooks.cilkplus.cilk_detect_spawn_and_unwrap (expr_p)); if (!seen_error ()) { ret = (enum gimplify_status)

Re: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++

On 11/28/2013 11:40 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: Consider the following test case. I took this from the lambda_spawns.cc line #203. as you can tell, it is clobbering the lambda closure at the end of the lambda calling and then it is catching value of A from main2 as it is supposed to. Yep,

Re: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++

On 11/27/2013 11:05 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: Found the bug. I was not utilizing the stabilize_expr's output correctly. Unfortunately, I think I was misleading you with talk of stabilize; like you said, you want to evaluate the whole expression in the spawned function rather than in the

RE: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++

-Original Message- From: Jason Merrill [mailto:ja...@redhat.com] Sent: Thursday, November 28, 2013 9:11 AM To: Iyer, Balaji V; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Jeff Law Subject: Re: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++ On 11/27/2013 11:05 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: Found the bug. I

RE: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++

-Original Message- From: Jason Merrill [mailto:ja...@redhat.com] Sent: Thursday, November 28, 2013 9:11 AM To: Iyer, Balaji V; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Jeff Law Subject: Re: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++ On 11/27/2013 11:05 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: Found the bug. I

Re: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++

On 11/25/2013 10:50 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: I have fixed this issue. My function to map the variable's context from the spawner to the spawn helper function was going into the lambda function. I made it stop by adding a language specific copy_tree_body (basically stop going into the lambda

RE: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++

-Original Message- From: Jason Merrill [mailto:ja...@redhat.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2013 12:43 PM To: Iyer, Balaji V; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Jeff Law Subject: Re: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++ On 11/25/2013 10:50 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: I have fixed

Re: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++

On 11/27/2013 01:25 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: I think a better approach would be to add a cp_build_cilk_spawn that uses stabilize_call to pre-evaluate the arguments of the call. I really can't pre-evaluate the calls before I move into the nested function because all those parts must be in the

Re: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++

On 11/27/2013 05:59 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: Well, if I use copy_tree_body_r for C and C++, in lambda functions, it asserts in varasm.c. The main reason I see that, the copy_tree_body_r walks into the closure and then maps the variables from the lambda function from the spawner to the helper

RE: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++

-Original Message- From: Jason Merrill [mailto:ja...@redhat.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2013 8:24 PM To: Iyer, Balaji V; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Jeff Law Subject: Re: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++ On 11/27/2013 05:59 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: Well, if I use

RE: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++

Hi Jason, Please see my responses below -Original Message- From: Jason Merrill [mailto:ja...@redhat.com] Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 10:51 AM To: Iyer, Balaji V; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Jeff Law Subject: Re: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++ On 11/21/2013 05:40 PM

Re: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++

On 11/21/2013 05:40 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: +/* Returns a TRY_CATCH_EXPR that will encapsulate BODY, EXCEPT_DATA and + EXCEPT_FLAG. */ + +tree +create_cilk_try_catch (tree except_flag, tree except_data, tree body) +{ + tree catch_list = alloc_stmt_list (); + append_to_statement_list

RE: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++

@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Jeff Law Subject: Re: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++ On 11/17/2013 10:19 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: cp/cp-cilkplus.o \ - cp/cp-gimplify.o cp/cp-array-notation.o cp/lambda.o \ + cp/cp-gimplify.o cp/cp-array-notation.o cp/lambda.o cp/cp-cilk.o \ It seems unnecessary to have

Re: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++

On 11/17/2013 10:19 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: cp/cp-cilkplus.o \ - cp/cp-gimplify.o cp/cp-array-notation.o cp/lambda.o \ + cp/cp-gimplify.o cp/cp-array-notation.o cp/lambda.o cp/cp-cilk.o \ It seems unnecessary to have both cp-cilk.c and cp-cilkplus.c. Please combine them. + extern

[PING]: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++

approved. Thanks, Balaji V. Iyer. -Original Message- From: Iyer, Balaji V Sent: Sunday, November 17, 2013 10:19 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Jason Merrill (ja...@redhat.com); Jeff Law Subject: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++ Hello Jason et al., Mike Stump mentioned

_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++

Hello Jason et al., Mike Stump mentioned that my _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++ may have been lost in the email pile. So, attached is an updated _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++ patch. Is this Ok to install? Here are the ChangeLog entries (they shouldn't have changed since

Re: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C (and C++)

On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 09:01:45PM +, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: Thanks! I will extract and check in the Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C work. This broke bootstrap on i686-linux, fixed thusly, committed as obvious: 2013-10-30 Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com * cilk.c

Re: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C (and C++)

On 10/22/13 10:22, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: Hi Jeff, I have attached 2 patches - 1 for C and 1 for C++ - along with the changelogs (ChangeLog.cilkplus for C and common changes, cp-ChangeLog.cilkplus for C++ specific files) with the changes you have requested. Answers to your questions are given

RE: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C (and C++)

@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C (and C++) On 10/22/13 10:22, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: Hi Jeff, I have attached 2 patches - 1 for C and 1 for C++ - along with the changelogs (ChangeLog.cilkplus for C and common changes, cp-ChangeLog.cilkplus

RE: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C (and C++)

Can you take a look at calls.c::special_function_p and determine if we need to do something special for spawn here? I will look into it and let you know. Any word on this? Hi Jeff, I looked into this function and from what I can tell, it is used to mark certain functions

Re: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C (and C++)

On 10/23/13 13:46, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: Can you take a look at calls.c::special_function_p and determine if we need to do something special for spawn here? I will look into it and let you know. Any word on this? Hi Jeff, I looked into this function and from what I can tell, it is

RE: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C (and C++)

and _Cilk_sync) for C (and C++) On 10/23/13 13:46, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: Can you take a look at calls.c::special_function_p and determine if we need to do something special for spawn here? I will look into it and let you know. Any word on this? Hi Jeff, I looked

Re: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C (and C++)

On 10/16/13 15:49, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: In ira.c: + /* We need a frame pointer for all Cilk Plus functions that use + Cilk keywords. */ + || (flag_enable_cilkplus cfun-is_cilk_function) Can you explain to me a bit more why you need a frame pointer? I'm trying to

Re: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C (and C++)

On 10/18/13 15:06, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: Hi Jeff, Please see my comments below. Also, I am adding all these changes to the files as you requested in my local directory. Should I send you an updated patch along the way? I'll let you know when I've worked my way through everything. ISTM an

Re: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C (and C++)

On 10/18/13 15:06, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: The main reason why I made it volatile (as expressed by the volatil bool variable) is that I want to make sure these values aren't optimized by the compiler and the value is fetched from memory on every access. I have added an explanation to the header

Re: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C (and C++)

On 09/11/13 12:18, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: Hello Everyone, Couple weeks back, I had submitted a patch for review that will implement Cilk keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) into the C compiler. I recently finished C++ implementation also. In this email, I am attaching 2 patches: 1 for C (and

RE: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C (and C++)

: Thursday, October 17, 2013 5:30 PM To: Iyer, Balaji V; r...@redhat.com; Jason Merrill (ja...@redhat.com); Aldy Hernandez (al...@redhat.com) Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C (and C++) On 09/11/13 12:18, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: Hello

Re: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C (and C++)

On 09/11/13 12:18, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: Hello Everyone, Couple weeks back, I had submitted a patch for review that will implement Cilk keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) into the C compiler. I recently finished C++ implementation also. In this email, I am attaching 2 patches: 1 for C (and

Re: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C (and C++)

On 09/11/13 12:18, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: Hello Everyone, Couple weeks back, I had submitted a patch for review that will implement Cilk keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) into the C compiler. I recently finished C++ implementation also. In this email, I am attaching 2 patches: 1 for C (and

[PING][PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C (and C++)

Law; Aldy Hernandez (al...@redhat.com) Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: RE: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C (and C++) Hello Everyone, Couple weeks back, I had submitted a patch for review that will implement Cilk keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync

[PING]RE: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C (and C++)

-patches@gcc.gnu.org' Subject: RE: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C (and C++) Hello, Has anyone had a chance to look at this. The C++ part is only a week old, but the C part has been in review for ~3 weeks. I would greatly appreciate if someone could review

RE: [PING]RE: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C (and C++)

'; 'Jason Merrill (ja...@redhat.com)'; 'Jeff Law'; 'Aldy Hernandez (al...@redhat.com)' Cc: 'gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org' Subject: [PING]RE: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C (and C++) Hello, Has anyone got a chance to look into this patch? Thanks, Balaji V

RE: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C (and C++)

- From: Iyer, Balaji V Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2013 2:18 PM To: r...@redhat.com; Jason Merrill (ja...@redhat.com); Jeff Law; Aldy Hernandez (al...@redhat.com) Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: RE: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C (and C++) Hello Everyone

Re: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C (and C++)

On 09/17/2013 08:50 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: Hello, Has anyone had a chance to look at this. The C++ part is only a week old, but the C part has been in review for ~3 weeks. I would greatly appreciate if someone could review this and approve for trunk if it is Ok for trunk. Obviously not yet.

Re: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C

+ case CILK_SYNC_STMT: +{ + if (!cfun-cilk_frame_decl) + { + error_at (input_location, expected %_Cilk_spawn% before + %_Cilk_sync%); + ret = GS_ERROR; + } First, surely you have a location you can use, instead of the

Re: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C

On 08/27/13 16:27, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: Hello Aldy, I went through all the emails and here are the major issues that I could gather (other than lowering the keywords after gimplification, which I am skipping since it is more of an optimization for now). Ok, for now I am fine with delaying

Re: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C

On 08/21/13 14:59, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: -Original Message- From: Aldy Hernandez [mailto:al...@redhat.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 11:31 AM To: Iyer, Balaji V Cc: r...@redhat.com; Jeff Law; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync

Re: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C

Even more review stuff. Are you keeping track of all this Balaji? :) + if (warn) +warning (0, suspicious use of _Cilk_spawn); First, as I've mentioned, this error message is very ambiguous. You should strive to provide better error messages. See my previous comment on this same line

Re: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C

On 08/21/2013 09:31 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote: May I stress again the importance of tests-- which are especially critical for new language features. You don't want cilk silently breaking thus rendering all your hard work moot, do you? :)) Agreed. While we don't have a strict policy for testing

RE: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C

-Original Message- From: Aldy Hernandez [mailto:al...@redhat.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 11:31 AM To: Iyer, Balaji V Cc: r...@redhat.com; Jeff Law; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C Even more review stuff

Re: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C

[rth, law, jakub: Your input required throughout...please.] More review stuff... Overall, I must say, I'm not a big fan of the super early expansion you're doing right after parsing. I mean, you leave CILK_SPAWN and CILK_SYNC keywords as is (in tree form until gimplification) but there's

RE: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C

...@redhat.com; Jeff Law; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Jakub Jelinek Subject: Re: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C [rth, law, jakub: Your input required throughout...please.] More review stuff... Overall, I must say, I'm not a big fan of the super early expansion you're

Re: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C

@@ -960,6 +960,7 @@ SCEV_H = tree-scalar-evolution.h $(GGC_H) tree-chrec.h $(PARAMS_H) OMEGA_H = omega.h $(PARAMS_H) TREE_DATA_REF_H = tree-data-ref.h $(OMEGA_H) graphds.h $(SCEV_H) TREE_INLINE_H = tree-inline.h +CILK_H = cilk.h REAL_H = real.h $(MACHMODE_H) IRA_INT_H = ira.h ira-int.h

RE: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C

: Friday, August 09, 2013 12:52 PM To: Iyer, Balaji V Cc: Aldy Hernandez; r...@redhat.com; Jeff Law; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: RE: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C On Thu, 8 Aug 2013, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: +enum add_variable_type { Two spaces before '{', should

Re: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C

--- gcc/expr.c +++ gcc/expr.c @@ -9569,6 +9569,21 @@ expand_expr_real_1 (tree exp, rtx target, enum machine_mode tmode, } return expand_constructor (exp, target, modifier, false); +case INDIRECT_REF: + { + tree exp1 = TREE_OPERAND (exp, 0); + if

RE: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C

On Thu, 8 Aug 2013, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: +enum add_variable_type { Two spaces before '{', should be one. +static HOST_WIDE_INT cilk_wrapper_count; This is HOST_WIDE_INT but you use it later with sprintf with %ld; you need to use HOST_WIDE_INT_PRINT_DEC in such a case + tree map =

Re: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C

[Richard, small question for you below]. Not all your changes to Makefile.in have a changelog entry. +c-family/cilk.o : c-family/cilk.c $(TREE_H) $(SYSTEM_H) $(CONFIG_H) toplev.h \ +$(TREE_H) coretypes.h tree-iterator.h $(TREE_INLINE_H) $(CGRAPH_H) \ +

Re: [PATCH] Cilk Keywords (_Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync) for C

On 08/06/2013 06:49 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote: --- gcc/ipa-inline-analysis.c +++ gcc/ipa-inline-analysis.c @@ -1433,6 +1433,9 @@ initialize_inline_failed (struct cgraph_edge *e) e-inline_failed = CIF_REDEFINED_EXTERN_INLINE; else if (e-call_stmt_cannot_inline_p) e-inline_failed =