From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32370 invoked by alias); 1 May 2006 16:11:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 32341 invoked by alias); 1 May 2006 16:11:12 -0000 Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 16:11:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20060501161112.32340.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug c++/26943] [gomp] firstprivate not working properly with non-POD In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "dnovillo at redhat dot com" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2006-05/txt/msg00045.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Comment #6 from dnovillo at redhat dot com 2006-05-01 16:11 ------- Subject: Re: [gomp] firstprivate not working properly with non-POD -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > ------- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-01 16:07 ------- > We do need a barrier (well, in some cases with extra code we can avoid > it in some cases), in order to honor 2.8.3.4: > "If a list item appears in both firstprivate and lastprivate clauses, the > update > required for lastprivate occurs after all the initializations for > firstprivate." > Ah, yes, of course. Sorry about that. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFEVjMVUTa2oAUaiwQRAkViAJ4s5n62EohuFxCUWVQGZ1owtoSTcACfZR7i NgLf43AMmOQ0xLmnl89ZkYQ= =cjzg -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26943