I'm Ok with it if Alexey approves.
On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 10:52 AM, Hahnfeld, Jonas <hahnf...@itc.rwth-aachen.de> wrote: > Hi Hans, Alexey, > > can we merge this commit and r295474 for the 4.0 release or is it already > too late for that? I will totally understand that and can apply these > commits locally prior to installing. > However, I think that these changes are quite focussed and bear minimal > possibility of introducing regressions. > > Thanks, > Jonas > > Am Freitag, den 17.02.2017, 18:32 +0000 schrieb Jonas Hahnfeld via > cfe-commits: > > Author: hahnfeld > Date: Fri Feb 17 12:32:51 2017 > New Revision: 295473 > > URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=295473&view=rev > Log: > [OpenMP] Remove barriers at cancel and cancellation point > > This resolves a deadlock with the cancel directive when there is no explicit > cancellation point. In that case, the implicit barrier acts as cancellation > point. After removing the barrier after cancel, the now unmatched barrier > for > the explicit cancellation point has to go as well. > > This has probably worked before rL255992: With the calls for the explicit > barrier, it was sure that all threads passed a barrier before exiting. > > Reported by Simon Convent and Joachim Protze! > > Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30088 > > Modified: > cfe/trunk/lib/CodeGen/CGOpenMPRuntime.cpp > cfe/trunk/test/OpenMP/cancel_codegen.cpp > cfe/trunk/test/OpenMP/cancellation_point_codegen.cpp _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits