From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 1643) id 500533AA8CB5; Fri, 21 May 2021 18:54:55 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 500533AA8CB5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" From: Thomas Schwinge To: gcc-cvs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [gcc r12-986] [OpenACC privatization] Explain OpenACC privatization candidate selection [PR90115] X-Act-Checkin: gcc X-Git-Author: Thomas Schwinge X-Git-Refname: refs/heads/master X-Git-Oldrev: ad4612cb048b261f6834e9155e41e40e9252c80b X-Git-Newrev: 5a0fe1f6c4ad0e50bf4684e723ae2ba17d94c9e4 Message-Id: <20210521185455.500533AA8CB5@sourceware.org> Date: Fri, 21 May 2021 18:54:55 +0000 (GMT) X-BeenThere: gcc-cvs@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-cvs mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 May 2021 18:54:55 -0000 https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5a0fe1f6c4ad0e50bf4684e723ae2ba17d94c9e4 commit r12-986-g5a0fe1f6c4ad0e50bf4684e723ae2ba17d94c9e4 Author: Thomas Schwinge Date: Thu May 20 15:55:18 2021 +0200 [OpenACC privatization] Explain OpenACC privatization candidate selection [PR90115] gcc/ PR middle-end/90115 * omp-low.c (oacc_privatization_candidate_p): New function. (oacc_privatization_scan_clause_chain) (oacc_privatization_scan_decl_chain): Use it. Also 'gcc_checking_assert' that we're not seeing duplicates. Diff: --- gcc/omp-low.c | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/gcc/omp-low.c b/gcc/omp-low.c index a86c6c1e82c..577676b2a16 100644 --- a/gcc/omp-low.c +++ b/gcc/omp-low.c @@ -10144,6 +10144,36 @@ lower_omp_for_lastprivate (struct omp_for_data *fd, gimple_seq *body_p, } } +/* OpenACC privatization. + + Or, in other words, *sharing* at the respective OpenACC level of + parallelism. + + From a correctness perspective, a non-addressable variable can't be accessed + outside the current thread, so it can go in a (faster than shared memory) + register -- though that register may need to be broadcast in some + circumstances. A variable can only meaningfully be "shared" across workers + or vector lanes if its address is taken, e.g. by a call to an atomic + builtin. + + From an optimisation perspective, the answer might be fuzzier: maybe + sometimes, using shared memory directly would be faster than + broadcasting. */ + +static bool +oacc_privatization_candidate_p (const tree decl) +{ + bool res = true; + + if (res && !VAR_P (decl)) + res = false; + + if (res && !TREE_ADDRESSABLE (decl)) + res = false; + + return res; +} + /* Scan CLAUSES for candidates for adjusting OpenACC privatization level in CTX. */ @@ -10154,8 +10184,12 @@ oacc_privatization_scan_clause_chain (omp_context *ctx, tree clauses) if (OMP_CLAUSE_CODE (c) == OMP_CLAUSE_PRIVATE) { tree decl = OMP_CLAUSE_DECL (c); - if (VAR_P (decl) && TREE_ADDRESSABLE (decl)) - ctx->oacc_privatization_candidates.safe_push (decl); + + if (!oacc_privatization_candidate_p (decl)) + continue; + + gcc_checking_assert (!ctx->oacc_privatization_candidates.contains (decl)); + ctx->oacc_privatization_candidates.safe_push (decl); } } @@ -10166,8 +10200,13 @@ static void oacc_privatization_scan_decl_chain (omp_context *ctx, tree decls) { for (tree decl = decls; decl; decl = DECL_CHAIN (decl)) - if (VAR_P (decl) && TREE_ADDRESSABLE (decl)) + { + if (!oacc_privatization_candidate_p (decl)) + continue; + + gcc_checking_assert (!ctx->oacc_privatization_candidates.contains (decl)); ctx->oacc_privatization_candidates.safe_push (decl); + } } /* Callback for walk_gimple_seq. Find #pragma omp scan statement. */