OpenMP offloading to NVPTX: backend patches

OpenMP offloading to NVPTX: backend patches

[Alexander Monakov]

Hello!

In responses to this email, I'll be posting 9 NVPTX-specific patches that are
required for enabling OpenMP offloading.  I intend to post corresponding
libgomp and middle-end changes that make these useful a bit later.

The patches are generated by taking a diff on amonakov/gomp-nvptx git branch,
and cutting it up into pieces that can be reviewed separately.  I've made an
effort to provide links to original patch submissions, which are even more
fine-grained, and provide verbose descriptions.

In a few places there's some "leakage" where a given hunk contains stuff from
separated patches. I hope it's obvious where it happens, and does not make
reviewing harder.

Even though the patches are posted separately, I think committing them
separately wouldn't be useful, i.e. I'd like to commit all at once after
review.

Please review for trunk.

Thanks.
Alexander

Ping: Re: OpenMP offloading to NVPTX: backend patches

[Jakub Jelinek]

Hi!

Now that we are in stage1, I'd like to ping this patch series from
Alexander.  As those are (mostly) patches against the nvptx backend,
they need to be reviewed by NVPTX maintainers, and are needed before the
corresponding generic OpenMP offloading and libgomp changes are reviewed.

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 07:52:07PM +0300, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> Hello!
> 
> In responses to this email, I'll be posting 9 NVPTX-specific patches that are
> required for enabling OpenMP offloading.  I intend to post corresponding
> libgomp and middle-end changes that make these useful a bit later.
> 
> The patches are generated by taking a diff on amonakov/gomp-nvptx git branch,
> and cutting it up into pieces that can be reviewed separately.  I've made an
> effort to provide links to original patch submissions, which are even more
> fine-grained, and provide verbose descriptions.
> 
> In a few places there's some "leakage" where a given hunk contains stuff from
> separated patches. I hope it's obvious where it happens, and does not make
> reviewing harder.
> 
> Even though the patches are posted separately, I think committing them
> separately wouldn't be useful, i.e. I'd like to commit all at once after
> review.
> 
> Please review for trunk.

	Jakub