Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] Add bfloat16 support for AVX512 register view.

On Fri, 24 Jul 2020 10:59:35 +0200 Felix Willgerodt via Gdb-patches wrote: > * features/i386/64bit-avx512.c > (create_feature_i386_64bit_avx512): Add vector v8bf. > (create_feature_i386_64bit_avx512): Add field v8_bfloat16. > * features/i386/64bit-avx512.xml: Likewise. >

Re: [PATCH] libgomp: Add master thread to thread pool

On Mon, 25 Mar 2019 19:30:57 +0100 Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 06:11:44PM -0700, Kevin Buettner wrote: > > For debugging purposes, I need to be able to find the master thread > > in the thread pool. > > > > Without this patch, I see over 20 fail

Re: [PATCH] libgomp: Add master thread to thread pool

Ping. On Fri, 22 Feb 2019 18:11:44 -0700 Kevin Buettner wrote: > For debugging purposes, I need to be able to find the master thread > in the thread pool. > > Without this patch, I see over 20 failures in the tests that I've > written for GDB. > > I've also tested

[PATCH] libgomp: Add master thread to thread pool

For debugging purposes, I need to be able to find the master thread in the thread pool. Without this patch, I see over 20 failures in the tests that I've written for GDB. I've also tested this in the gcc tree - no regressions. libgomp/ChangeLog: * team.c (gomp_team_start): Initialize

Re: [PATCH] Fix debuginfo in -fopenmp code (PR debug/87039)

On Fri, 16 Nov 2018 22:10:00 +0100 Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Kevin, did you have some gdb testcases you were trying for the r253335 > change? Can you try those with added another e.g. parallel around it (say > #pragma omp parallel if (0) or num_threads (1), so that it doesn't spawn too > many

Re: [PATCH] Add fields to struct gomp_thread for debugging purposes

On Sat, 4 Nov 2017 21:39:14 -0700 Kevin Buettner <kev...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Tue, 31 Oct 2017 08:03:22 +0100 > Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 04:06:15PM -0700, Kevin Buettner wrote: > > > This patch

Re: [PATCH] Add fields to struct gomp_thread for debugging purposes

On Tue, 31 Oct 2017 08:03:22 +0100 Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 04:06:15PM -0700, Kevin Buettner wrote: > > This patch adds a new member named "pthread_id" to the gomp_thread > > struct. It is initialized in team.c. >

Re: [PATCH] Add fields to struct gomp_thread for debugging purposes

Below is some additional information about the work I've been doing. It may be useful in understanding where I'm going with my libgomp patch and other patches still to come... I've been working on improvements to gdb, gcc, and libgomp which make GDB able to better access variables in an OpenMP

[PATCH] Add fields to struct gomp_thread for debugging purposes

This patch adds a new member named "pthread_id" to the gomp_thread struct. It is initialized in team.c. It also adds a field named "parent" which is initialized to the thread which created the thread in question. For non-nested parallel regions, this is always the master thread. These new

Re: [PING][PATCH] Output DIEs for outlined OpenMP functions in correct lexical scope

On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 18:08:39 +0200 Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 01:08:01PM -0700, Kevin Buettner wrote: > > Ping. > > Ok, thanks. Committed. Kevin > > On Mon, 7 Aug 2017 17:51:38 -0700 > > Kevin Buettner <kev...@re

[PING][PATCH] Output DIEs for outlined OpenMP functions in correct lexical scope

Ping. On Mon, 7 Aug 2017 17:51:38 -0700 Kevin Buettner <kev...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Wed, 10 May 2017 17:24:27 +0200 > Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > What I don't like is that the patch is inconsistent, it sets DECL_CONTEXT > > of the child f

Re: [PATCH] Output DIEs for outlined OpenMP functions in correct lexical scope

On Wed, 10 May 2017 17:24:27 +0200 Jakub Jelinek wrote: > What I don't like is that the patch is inconsistent, it sets DECL_CONTEXT > of the child function for all kinds of outlined functions, but then you just > choose one of the many places and add it into the BLOCK tree.

Re: [PATCH] Output DIEs for outlined OpenMP functions in correct lexical scope

On Fri, 5 May 2017 14:23:14 +0300 (MSK) Alexander Monakov <amona...@ispras.ru> wrote: > On Thu, 4 May 2017, Kevin Buettner wrote: > > diff --git a/gcc/omp-expand.c b/gcc/omp-expand.c > > index 5c48b78..7029951 100644 > > --- a/gcc/omp-expand.c > > +++ b/gcc/o

Re: [PATCH] Output DIEs for outlined OpenMP functions in correct lexical scope

Ahem... I forgot to note that: I have bootstrapped and regression tested my patch on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. Kevin On Thu, 4 May 2017 17:45:51 -0700 Kevin Buettner <kev...@redhat.com> wrote: > Consider the following OpenMP program: > > void foo (int a1) {} > >

[PATCH] Output DIEs for outlined OpenMP functions in correct lexical scope

Consider the following OpenMP program: void foo (int a1) {} int main (void) { static int s1 = -41; int i1 = 11, i2; for (i2 = 1; i2 <= 2; i2++) { int pass = i2; #pragma omp parallel num_threads (2) firstprivate (i1) {