From: Julian Brown <julian@codesourcery.com>
To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Cc: James Norris <jnorris@codesourcery.com>,
GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
"Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com>,
Nathan Sidwell <Nathan_Sidwell@mentor.com>
Subject: Re: [Bulk] [OpenACC 0/7] host_data construct
Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2015 18:33:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151102183339.365c3d33@octopus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151026183422.GW478@tucnak.redhat.com>
On Mon, 26 Oct 2015 19:34:22 +0100
Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
> Your use_device sounds very similar to use_device_ptr clause in
> OpenMP, which is allowed on #pragma omp target data construct and is
> implemented quite a bit differently from this; it is unclear if the
> OpenACC standard requires this kind of implementation, or you just
> chose to implement it this way. In particular, the GOMP_target_data
> call puts the variables mentioned in the use_device_ptr clauses into
> the mapping structures (similarly how map clause appears) and the
> corresponding vars are privatized within the target data region
> (which is a host region, basically a fancy { } braces), where the
> private variables contain the offloading device's pointers.
As the author of the original patch, I have to say using the mapping
structures seems like a far better approach, but I've hit some trouble
with the details of adapting OpenACC to use that method.
Firstly, on trunk at least, use_device_ptr variables are restricted to
pointer or array types: that restriction doesn't exist in OpenACC, nor
actually could I find it in the OpenMP 4.1 document (my guess is the
standards are supposed to match in this regard). I think that a program
such as this should work:
void target_fn (int *targ_data);
int
main (int argc, char *argv[])
{
char out;
int myvar;
#pragma omp target enter data map(to: myvar)
#pragma omp target data use_device_ptr(myvar) map(from:out)
{
target_fn (&myvar);
out = 5;
}
return 0;
}
"myvar" would have its address taken in the use_device_ptr region, and
places where the corresponding mapped variable has its address taken
would be replaced by a direct use of the mapped pointer. (Or is that
not a well-formed thing to do, in general?). This fails with "error:
'use_device_ptr' variable is neither a pointer nor an array".
Secondly, attempts to use use_device_ptr on (e.g.
dynamically-allocated) arrays accessed through a pointer cause an ICE
with the existing trunk OpenMP code:
#include <stdlib.h>
void target_fn (char *targ_data);
int
main (int argc, char *argv[])
{
char *myarr, out;
myarr = malloc (1024);
#pragma omp target data map(to: myarr[0:1024])
{
#pragma omp target data use_device_ptr(myarr) map(from:out)
{
target_fn (myarr);
out = 5;
}
}
return 0;
}
udp3.c: In function 'main':
udp3.c:6:1: internal compiler error: in make_decl_rtl, at varasm.c:1298
main (int argc, char *argv[])
^
0x111256b make_decl_rtl(tree_node*)
/scratch/jbrown/openacc-trunk/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/varasm.c:1294
0x9ea005 expand_expr_real_1(tree_node*, rtx_def*, machine_mode, expand_modifier, rtx_def**, bool)
/scratch/jbrown/openacc-trunk/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/expr.c:9559
0x9e31c2 expand_expr_real(tree_node*, rtx_def*, machine_mode, expand_modifier, rtx_def**, bool)
/scratch/jbrown/openacc-trunk/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/expr.c:7892
0x9cb4ae expand_expr
/scratch/jbrown/openacc-trunk/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/expr.h:255
0x9d907d expand_assignment(tree_node*, tree_node*, bool)
/scratch/jbrown/openacc-trunk/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/expr.c:5089
0x89e219 expand_gimple_stmt_1
/scratch/jbrown/openacc-trunk/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/cfgexpand.c:3576
0x89e60d expand_gimple_stmt
/scratch/jbrown/openacc-trunk/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/cfgexpand.c:3672
0x8a5773 expand_gimple_basic_block
/scratch/jbrown/openacc-trunk/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/cfgexpand.c:5676
0x8a72d4 execute
/scratch/jbrown/openacc-trunk/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/cfgexpand.c:6288
Furthermore, this looks strange to me (006t.omplower):
.omp_data_arr.5.out = &out;
myarr.8 = myarr;
.omp_data_arr.5.myarr = myarr.8;
#pragma omp target data map(from:out [len: 1]) use_device_ptr(myarr)
{
D.2436 = .omp_data_arr.5.myarr;
myarr = D.2436;
That's clobbering the original myarr variable, right?
Any clues on these two? The omp-low.c code is rather opaque to me...
Thanks,
Julian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-02 18:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-22 19:14 James Norris
2015-10-22 19:15 ` [OpenACC 1/7] host_data construct (C/C++ common) James Norris
2015-10-22 19:15 ` [OpenACC 2/7] host_data construct (C FE) James Norris
2015-10-22 19:16 ` [OpenACC 3/7] host_data construct (C front-end) James Norris
2015-10-22 19:18 ` [OpenACC 4/7] host_data construct (middle end) James Norris
2015-10-22 19:19 ` [OpenACC 5/7] host_data construct (gcc tests) James Norris
2015-10-22 19:20 ` [OpenACC 6/7] host_data construct James Norris
2015-10-22 19:22 ` [OpenACC 7/7] host_data construct (runtime tests) James Norris
2015-10-22 20:42 ` [OpenACC 0/7] host_data construct Joseph Myers
2015-10-22 20:53 ` James Norris
2015-10-23 16:01 ` [Bulk] " James Norris
2015-10-26 18:36 ` Jakub Jelinek
2015-10-27 15:57 ` Cesar Philippidis
2015-11-02 18:33 ` Julian Brown [this message]
2015-11-02 19:29 ` Jakub Jelinek
2015-11-12 11:16 ` Julian Brown
2015-11-18 12:48 ` Julian Brown
2015-11-19 13:13 ` Jakub Jelinek
2015-11-19 14:29 ` Julian Brown
2015-11-19 15:57 ` Jakub Jelinek
2015-11-30 19:34 ` Julian Brown
2015-12-01 8:30 ` Jakub Jelinek
2015-12-02 15:27 ` Tom de Vries
2015-12-02 15:59 ` Thomas Schwinge
2015-12-02 19:16 ` Cesar Philippidis
2015-12-02 19:28 ` Steve Kargl
2015-12-02 19:35 ` Jakub Jelinek
2015-12-02 19:54 ` Cesar Philippidis
2015-12-02 22:14 ` [gomp4] " Thomas Schwinge
2016-04-08 13:41 ` Fortran OpenACC host_data construct ICE (was: [gomp4] Re: [OpenACC 0/7] host_data construct) Thomas Schwinge
2016-02-02 13:57 ` [OpenACC 0/7] host_data construct Thomas Schwinge
2015-11-13 15:31 ` [Bulk] " Jakub Jelinek
2015-12-23 11:02 ` 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=20151102183339.365c3d33@octopus \
--to=julian@codesourcery.com \
--cc=Nathan_Sidwell@mentor.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=jnorris@codesourcery.com \
--cc=joseph@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).