From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32523 invoked by alias); 14 Dec 2012 19:38:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 32485 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Dec 2012 19:38:44 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mga14.intel.com (HELO mga14.intel.com) (143.182.124.37) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 14 Dec 2012 19:38:38 +0000 Received: from azsmga002.ch.intel.com ([10.2.17.35]) by azsmga102.ch.intel.com with ESMTP; 14 Dec 2012 11:38:34 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 Received: from fmsmsx106.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.19.9.37]) by AZSMGA002.ch.intel.com with ESMTP; 14 Dec 2012 11:38:34 -0800 Received: from fmsmsx102.amr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.2.188]) by FMSMSX106.amr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.6.54]) with mapi id 14.01.0355.002; Fri, 14 Dec 2012 11:38:34 -0800 From: "Iyer, Balaji V" To: Jakub Jelinek CC: "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" Subject: RE: [PATCH][Cilkplus] Fix pragma simd info being lost Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 19:38:00 -0000 Message-ID: References: <20121214165843.GZ2315@tucnak.redhat.com> <20121214170830.GA2315@tucnak.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20121214170830.GA2315@tucnak.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2012-12/txt/msg00994.txt.bz2 > -----Original Message----- > From: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches- > owner@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Jakub Jelinek > Sent: Friday, December 14, 2012 12:09 PM > To: Iyer, Balaji V > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH][Cilkplus] Fix pragma simd info being lost >=20 > On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 05:01:48PM +0000, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: > > > Why do you think fatal_error is the right thing here? Why doesn't > > > normal error work? Generally, if one function contains 10 #pragma > > > simd loops that require vectorization and 5 out of them aren't > > > vectorized, it is nicer for users to be told about all 5 of them, rat= her than just > the first one. > > > fatal_error will exit immediately. > > > > The #pragma simd assert requires the compiler to halt compilation if > > the loop is not vectorized. This is why I used fatal_error. The > > default case is noassert. >=20 > The compilation is halted even with error, compiler will exit with non-ze= ro exit > status, won't compile any further functions, etc. OK, I will change them and send out another patch. >=20 > Jakub