Re: [patch] Add counter inits to zero_iter_bb in expand_omp_for_init_counts

[Thomas Schwinge <thomas@codesourcery.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1556 bytes --]

Hi Jakub and Tom!

On Thu, 1 Oct 2015 15:37:26 +0200, Tom de Vries <Tom_deVries@mentor.com> wrote:
> On 01/10/15 14:49, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 02:46:01PM +0200, Tom de Vries wrote:
> >> this patch adds initialization in zero_iter_bb of counters introduced in
> >> expand_omp_for_init_counts.
> >>
> >> This removes the need to set TREE_NO_WARNING on those counters.
> >
> > Why do you think it is a good idea?
> 
> [...]

> >  Furthermore, I'd prefer not to change this area of code before
> > gomp-4_1-branch is merged, as it will be a nightmare for the merge
> > otherwise.
> 
> Committing to gomp-4_0-branch for now would work for me.

Well, the "nightmare" to merge this thus fell onto me...  In particular,
as part of my gomp-4_0-branch r229255,
<http://news.gmane.org/find-root.php?message_id=%3C877fmd7lig.fsf%40schwinge.name%3E>,
I "butchered" your (Tom's) code (gomp-4_0-branch r228595) to work in
context of Jakub's changes -- would you please check that out (current
gomp-4_0-branch)?  Even though there are no testsuite regressions, given
my lack of detailed understanding of this code, I'm not too sure about my
changes.

Here's, briefly, what I did: in gcc/omp-low.c:expand_omp_for_init_counts
extend created_zero_iter_bb handling for fd->ordered; at the end of that
function, individually decide (lame...) whether to use zero_iter1_bb or
zero_iter2_bb; in gcc/omp-low.c:expand_omp_for_generic remove
TREE_NO_WARNING code for the new zero_iter2_bb case, too.


Grüße,
 Thomas

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 472 bytes --]