public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tobias Burnus <tobias@codesourcery.com>
To: Thomas Schwinge <thomas@codesourcery.com>
Cc: <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Fix Intel MIC 'mkoffload' for OpenMP 'requires' (was: [Patch] OpenMP: Move omp requires checks to libgomp)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2022 15:30:57 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1116448f-eb76-76b3-8aaf-a0e44330c161@codesourcery.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87mtdml8ks.fsf@dem-tschwing-1.ger.mentorg.com>

Hi Thomas,

On 06.07.22 14:38, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> :-) Haha, that's actually *exactly* what I had implemented first!  But
> then I realized that 'target offloading_enabled' is doing exactly that:
> check that offloading compilation is configured -- not that "there is an
> offloading device available or not" as you seem to understand?  Or am I
> confused there?

I think as you mentioned below – there is a difference. And that difference,
I explicitly maked use of:
  - libgomp.c-c++-common/requires-{1,5,7}.c test the device lto1 compiler,
    which requires that it is actually available. Thus, I used:
    /* { dg-do link { target { offload_target_nvptx || offload_target_amdgcn } } } */
while
  - libgomp.c-c++-common/requires-2.c checks that ENABLE_OFFLOADING == true, i.e.
    the host lto1 compiler is configured to create the offload tables and, thus,
    can diagnose the omp-requires mismatch. Hence, the testcase has:
    /* { dg-do link { target offloading_enabled } } */
    /* { dg-additional-options "-foffload=disable -flto" } */

Granted, as the other files do not use -foffload=..., it should not
make a difference - but, still, replacing it unconditionally
with 'target offloading_enabled' feels wrong.

I was about to write again about --enable-offload-defaulted and
having no offloading compilers installed. But that comes too late.
gcc.cc (the driver) will set
   OFFLOAD_TARGET_NAMES=
to the configured offload-target compilers (after -foffload= filtering),
but the is-available check is only done in lto-wrapper.cc, which comes
too late. But I admit it is unlikely that someone configures + builds
offload compilers and, then, for testing have no offload compilers
available.

> I do however agree that (generally) replacing 'target offloading_enabled'
> with a new 'target offload_target_any' would seem appropriate (as a
> separate patch), because that would also do the right thing when running
> libgomp testing with non-default '-foffload=[...]', including
> '-foffload=disable'.

I concur – but I would prefer to have that lib/libgomp.exp patch committed
before the testsuite-part of this patch is committed. Albeit, I do not feel
very strong about this.

Tobias

-----------------
Siemens Electronic Design Automation GmbH; Anschrift: Arnulfstraße 201, 80634 München; Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung; Geschäftsführer: Thomas Heurung, Frank Thürauf; Sitz der Gesellschaft: München; Registergericht München, HRB 106955

  reply	other threads:[~2022-07-06 13:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-01-13 15:07 [PATCH, OpenMP 5.0] More implementation of the requires directive Chung-Lin Tang
2021-01-13 15:27 ` Jakub Jelinek
2021-03-25 11:18 ` Thomas Schwinge
2022-03-29 13:42 ` Andrew Stubbs
2022-06-08  3:56 ` [Patch] OpenMP: Move omp requires checks to libgomp Tobias Burnus
2022-06-09 11:40   ` Jakub Jelinek
2022-06-09 12:46     ` Tobias Burnus
2022-06-09 14:19       ` Jakub Jelinek
2022-06-29 14:33         ` [Patch][v4] " Tobias Burnus
2022-06-29 17:02           ` Jakub Jelinek
2022-06-29 18:10             ` Tobias Burnus
2022-06-29 20:18               ` Jakub Jelinek
2022-07-01 13:06                 ` [Patch][v5] " Tobias Burnus
2022-07-01 14:34                   ` Jakub Jelinek
2022-07-01 16:31                     ` Tobias Burnus
2022-07-01 16:55                       ` Jakub Jelinek
2022-07-01 21:08                         ` Tobias Burnus
2022-07-04  8:31                           ` Jakub Jelinek
2022-07-07 13:26                           ` Fix one issue in OpenMP 'requires' directive diagnostics (was: [Patch][v5] OpenMP: Move omp requires checks to libgomp) Thomas Schwinge
2022-07-07 13:56                             ` Tobias Burnus
2022-07-08  6:59                               ` Thomas Schwinge
2022-07-06 10:42                   ` Restore 'GOMP_offload_unregister_ver' functionality " Thomas Schwinge
2022-07-06 13:59                     ` Tobias Burnus
2022-07-06 21:08                       ` Thomas Schwinge
2022-08-17 11:45                       ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-09-15  9:41                   ` [Patch][v5] OpenMP: Move omp requires checks to libgomp Thomas Schwinge
2022-07-07  8:37           ` Adjust 'libgomp.c-c++-common/requires-3.c' (was: [Patch][v4] OpenMP: Move omp requires checks to libgomp) Thomas Schwinge
2022-07-07  9:02             ` Tobias Burnus
2022-07-07  8:42           ` Enhance 'libgomp.c-c++-common/requires-4.c', 'libgomp.c-c++-common/requires-5.c' testing " Thomas Schwinge
2022-07-07  9:36             ` Tobias Burnus
2022-07-07 10:42               ` Thomas Schwinge
2022-07-06 10:30   ` Define 'OMP_REQUIRES_[...]', 'GOMP_REQUIRES_[...]' in a single place (was: [Patch] " Thomas Schwinge
2022-07-06 13:40     ` Tobias Burnus
2022-07-06 11:04   ` Fix Intel MIC 'mkoffload' for OpenMP 'requires' " Thomas Schwinge
2022-07-06 11:29     ` Tobias Burnus
2022-07-06 12:38       ` Thomas Schwinge
2022-07-06 13:30         ` Tobias Burnus [this message]
2022-07-07 10:46           ` Thomas Schwinge
2022-07-06 14:19     ` Tobias Burnus
2024-03-07 12:38   ` nvptx: 'cuDeviceGetCount' failure is fatal " Thomas Schwinge
2024-03-07 14:28     ` nvptx: 'cuDeviceGetCount' failure is fatal Tobias Burnus
2024-03-08 15:58       ` Thomas Schwinge

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=1116448f-eb76-76b3-8aaf-a0e44330c161@codesourcery.com \
    --to=tobias@codesourcery.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=jakub@redhat.com \
    --cc=thomas@codesourcery.com \
    /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: link
Be 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).