This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH][Cilkplus] Fix pragma simd info being lost
- From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- To: "Iyer, Balaji V" <balaji dot v dot iyer at intel dot com>
- Cc: "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 17:58:43 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH][Cilkplus] Fix pragma simd info being lost
- References: <BF230D13CA30DD48930C31D40993300016CEBE98@FMSMSX102.amr.corp.intel.com>
- Reply-to: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 04:59:02AM +0000, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
> --- tree-vect-loop.c (revision 194483)
> +++ tree-vect-loop.c (working copy)
> @@ -234,8 +234,8 @@
> if (flag_enable_cilk && pragma_simd_assert_requested_p
> (loop->pragma_simd_index))
> {
> - error ("Loop not vectorized. "
> - "Exiting as requested by Pragma SIMD");
> + fatal_error ("Loop not vectorized. "
> + "Exiting as requested by Pragma SIMD");
> }
> return false;
> }
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, rather than just the first one.
fatal_error will exit immediately.
Jakub