public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug other/95316] Offload compilation fails when not all offload compilers are installed that were configured Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 08:28:21 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-95316-4-WPtDZTvkFl@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-95316-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95316 Thomas Schwinge <tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org, | |tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org Last reconfirmed| |2020-05-26 Summary|[10 Regression] binary |Offload compilation fails |built with -fopenacc fails |when not all offload |to run when not all offload |compilers are installed |compilers are installed |that were configured |that were configured | --- Comment #1 from Thomas Schwinge <tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org> --- So the report is not "binary built with -fopenacc fails to run when [...]" but rather "compilation with -fopenacc fails when [...]"? And, same for '-fopenmp' for OpenMP 'target' offloading? So I'm changing the Summary to: "Offload compilation fails when [...]". (Please adjust if I've misunderstood.) I don't think this is a regression: wouldn't you've gotten the same behavior already before GCC 10 added GCN offloading, for example, when you had built GCC with '--enable-offload-targets=nvptx-none' but then didn't have the nvptx offloading compiler installed? I'm thus removing the "regression" tag. (Please put it back if I've misunderstood.) I agree that the current driver (?) behavior is not ideal. I suppose the default offload targets configuration (unless overridden by '-foffload') should be made so that if an offload compiler is not present, it is silently skipped. That is, without printing a warning (as has been suggested), as that would produce a lot of noise. If an offload target has been explicitly requested via '-foffload=[target]', then that should result in a hard error, of course, if the respective offload compiler is not available.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-05-26 8:28 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2020-05-25 15:56 [Bug other/95316] New: [10 Regression] binary built with -fopenacc fails to run " doko at debian dot org 2020-05-26 7:17 ` [Bug other/95316] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-05-26 8:28 ` tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2020-05-26 12:42 ` [Bug other/95316] Offload compilation fails " doko at debian dot org 2020-07-23 6:51 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-04-08 12:02 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-06-28 10:40 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-07-07 8:53 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-07-26 22:30 ` burnus@net-b.de
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=bug-95316-4-WPtDZTvkFl@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).