On 2019/1/7 10:15 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
Well, the "Properly handle wait clause with no arguments" changes still
need to be completed and go in first (to avoid introducing regressions),
and then I will have to see your whole set of changes that you intend to
commit: the bits you've
Hi Chung-Lin!
On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 17:47:10 +0800, Chung-Lin Tang
wrote:
> this is the current version of the oacc-* parts of the Async Re-work patch.
>
> I have reverted away from the earlier mentioned attempt of using lockless
> techniques to manage the asyncqueues; it is really hard to do in
Hi Chung-Lin!
On Wed, 2 Jan 2019 20:46:12 +0800, Chung-Lin Tang
wrote:
> Hi Thomas, Happy New Year,
Thanks! If I remember right, you still have a few weeks until "your" New
Year/Spring Festival, right?
> On 2018/12/19 5:03 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> >> +
> >> + if
Hi Thomas,
this is the current version of the oacc-* parts of the Async Re-work patch.
I have reverted away from the earlier mentioned attempt of using lockless
techniques to manage the asyncqueues; it is really hard to do in a 100% correct
manner, unless we only use something like simple lists
Hi Thomas, Happy New Year,
On 2018/12/19 5:03 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
+
+ if (!dev->openacc.async.asyncqueue[async])
+{
+ dev->openacc.async.asyncqueue[async] = dev->openacc.async.construct_func
();
+
+ if (!dev->openacc.async.asyncqueue[async])
+ {
+
Hi Chung-Lin!
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 00:04:56 +0800, Chung-Lin Tang
wrote:
> On 2018/12/19 5:03 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> > On Tue, 18 Dec 2018 23:06:38 +0800, Chung-Lin Tang
> > wrote:
> >> this part includes some of the lookup_goacc_asyncqueue fixes we talked
> >> about.
> >> I am still
On 2018/12/19 5:03 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
Hi Chung-Lin!
On Tue, 18 Dec 2018 23:06:38 +0800, Chung-Lin Tang
wrote:
this part includes some of the lookup_goacc_asyncqueue fixes we talked about.
I am still thinking about how the queue lock problem should really be solved,
so regard
this
Hi Chung-Lin!
On Tue, 18 Dec 2018 23:06:38 +0800, Chung-Lin Tang
wrote:
> this part includes some of the lookup_goacc_asyncqueue fixes we talked about.
> I am still thinking about how the queue lock problem should really be solved,
> so regard
> this patch as just fixing some of the problems.
On 2018/9/25 9:10 PM, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
Hi Thomas,
These are the OpenACC specific changes, mostly the re-implementation of
async-related acc_* runtime
library API functions to use the new backend plugin interfaces, in a non-target
specific way.
Hi Thomas,
this part includes some of the
Hi Chung-Lin!
On Tue, 18 Dec 2018 18:02:54 +0800, Chung-Lin Tang
wrote:
> On 2018/12/17 10:32 PM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> >> The reason there are deadlocks from inside the plugin on
> >> GOMP_PLUGIN_fatal() is when we hold the
> >> struct gomp_device_descr's*device* lock, which is also
On 2018/12/17 10:32 PM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
The reason there are deadlocks from inside the plugin on GOMP_PLUGIN_fatal() is
when we hold the
struct gomp_device_descr's*device* lock, which is also acquired when we
execute atexit device shutdown handlers, hence the deadlock.
I don't think
On 2018/12/17 9:52 PM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
Hi Chung-Lin!
On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 22:52:44 +0800, Chung-Lin Tang
wrote:
On 2018/12/14 10:17 PM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 21:10:47 +0800, Chung-Lin Tang
wrote:
--- a/libgomp/oacc-async.c
+++ b/libgomp/oacc-async.c
Hi Chung-Lin!
On Mon, 17 Dec 2018 19:03:12 +0800, Chung-Lin Tang
wrote:
> On 2018/12/14 10:56 PM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> > + //TODO Are these safe to call, or might this cause deadlock if
> > something's locked?
> > CUDA_CALL_ASSERT (cuEventCreate, , CU_EVENT_DISABLE_TIMING);
> >
Hi Chung-Lin!
On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 23:00:57 +0800, Chung-Lin Tang
wrote:
> On 2018/12/14 10:53 PM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> > Please comment on the one TODO
> > which before your async re-work also was -- incorrectly? -- run
> > asynchronously?
> > @@ -563,6 +563,8 @@ GOACC_update (int device,
Hi Chung-Lin!
On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 22:42:28 +0800, Chung-Lin Tang
wrote:
> On 2018/12/14 10:32 PM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> > Invoked as "acc_wait_async ([...], acc_async_sync)" (as used in a test
> > case that I'll soon submit/commit), we'll end up with "aq2 == NULL", and
> > will segfault in
Hi Chung-Lin!
On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 22:52:44 +0800, Chung-Lin Tang
wrote:
> On 2018/12/14 10:17 PM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> > On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 21:10:47 +0800, Chung-Lin Tang
> > wrote:
> >> --- a/libgomp/oacc-async.c
> >> +++ b/libgomp/oacc-async.c
> >
> >> +attribute_hidden struct
On 2018/12/14 10:56 PM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
Hi Chung-Lin!
On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 21:10:47 +0800, Chung-Lin Tang
wrote:
--- a/libgomp/oacc-async.c
+++ b/libgomp/oacc-async.c
+attribute_hidden struct goacc_asyncqueue *
+lookup_goacc_asyncqueue (struct goacc_thread *thr, bool create, int async)
On 2018/12/14 10:53 PM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
Additionally the following, or why not? Please comment on the one TODO
which before your async re-work also was -- incorrectly? -- run
asynchronously?
diff --git libgomp/oacc-parallel.c libgomp/oacc-parallel.c
index 5a441c9efe38..91875c57fc97
Hi Chung-Lin!
On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 21:10:47 +0800, Chung-Lin Tang
wrote:
> --- a/libgomp/oacc-async.c
> +++ b/libgomp/oacc-async.c
> +attribute_hidden struct goacc_asyncqueue *
> +lookup_goacc_asyncqueue (struct goacc_thread *thr, bool create, int async)
> +{
> + /* The special value
Hi Chung-Lin!
On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 21:10:47 +0800, Chung-Lin Tang
wrote:
> --- a/libgomp/oacc-parallel.c
> +++ b/libgomp/oacc-parallel.c
> @@ -377,8 +360,6 @@ GOACC_enter_exit_data (int device, size_t mapnum,
> finalize = true;
> }
>
> - acc_dev->openacc.async_set_async_func
On 2018/12/14 10:17 PM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
Hi Chung-Lin!
On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 21:10:47 +0800, Chung-Lin Tang
wrote:
--- a/libgomp/oacc-async.c
+++ b/libgomp/oacc-async.c
+attribute_hidden struct goacc_asyncqueue *
+lookup_goacc_asyncqueue (struct goacc_thread *thr, bool create, int
On 2018/12/14 10:32 PM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
Invoked as "acc_wait_async ([...], acc_async_sync)" (as used in a test
case that I'll soon submit/commit), we'll end up with "aq2 == NULL", and
will segfault in the nvptx "openacc.async.serialize_func".
What does "wait async(acc_async_sync)"
Hi Chung-Lin!
On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 21:10:47 +0800, Chung-Lin Tang
wrote:
> void
> acc_wait_async (int async1, int async2)
> {
> + struct goacc_thread *thr = get_goacc_thread ();
>
> + goacc_aq aq2 = lookup_goacc_asyncqueue (thr, true, async2);
> + goacc_aq aq1 = lookup_goacc_asyncqueue
Hi Chung-Lin!
On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 21:10:47 +0800, Chung-Lin Tang
wrote:
> --- a/libgomp/oacc-async.c
> +++ b/libgomp/oacc-async.c
> +attribute_hidden struct goacc_asyncqueue *
> +lookup_goacc_asyncqueue (struct goacc_thread *thr, bool create, int async)
> +{
> + /* The special value
Hi Chung-Lin!
On Fri, 7 Dec 2018 22:19:14 +0800, Chung-Lin Tang
wrote:
> On 2018/12/7 07:32 PM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> > Does the following make sense?
>
> I don't quite remember why I simply ensured asyncqueue creation here at the
> time,
> maybe simply because it allowed simpler code at
On 2018/12/7 07:32 PM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> Hi Chung-Lin!
>
> On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 21:10:47 +0800, Chung-Lin Tang
> wrote:
>> These are the OpenACC specific changes, mostly the re-implementation of
>> async-related acc_* runtime
>> library API functions to use the new backend plugin
Hi Chung-Lin!
On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 21:10:47 +0800, Chung-Lin Tang
wrote:
> These are the OpenACC specific changes, mostly the re-implementation of
> async-related acc_* runtime
> library API functions to use the new backend plugin interfaces, in a
> non-target specific way.
(The patch was
Hi Thomas,
These are the OpenACC specific changes, mostly the re-implementation of
async-related acc_* runtime
library API functions to use the new backend plugin interfaces, in a non-target
specific way.
Thanks,
Chung-Lin
* oacc-async.c (get_goacc_thread): New function.
28 matches
Mail list logo
