RE: [PATCH] _Cilk_for for C and C++

["Iyer, Balaji V" <balaji dot v dot iyer at intel dot com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jakub Jelinek [mailto:jakub@redhat.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 7, 2014 4:29 PM
> To: Iyer, Balaji V
> Cc: Jason Merrill; 'Jeff Law'; 'Aldy Hernandez'; 'gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org';
> 'rth@redhat.com'
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] _Cilk_for for C and C++
> 
> On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 09:24:21PM +0000, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Jason Merrill [mailto:jason@redhat.com]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, January 7, 2014 3:41 PM
> > > To: Iyer, Balaji V; 'Jeff Law'; 'Aldy Hernandez'
> > > Cc: 'gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org'; 'rth@redhat.com'; 'Jakub Jelinek'
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] _Cilk_for for C and C++
> > >
> > > On 12/17/2013 07:21 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
> > > > The reason why I store it in OMP_FOR_CLAUSE is because OMP clauses
> > > cannot occur in _Cilk_for. So adding a new clause seem to be an
> > > overkill IMHO. I need a place to store the grain value and so I chose this
> spot.
> > >
> > > But code expects OMP_FOR_CLAUSES to have a certain form, and you
> are
> > > violating that so that now code needs to check whether we're dealing
> > > with a for loop in order to know to parse OMP_FOR_CLAUSES.  Doing it
> > > your way requires lots of little special cases.  Please represent it as a
> clause.
> >
> > Hi Jason,
> > 	In gimplify_omp_for, I remove the information in
> OMP_FOR_CLAUSES ()
> > 	and then replace it with a NULL_TREE.  Till that point, nothing
> > 	steps on it (except in pt.c and that I am handling it).  Then the
> > 	grain value is stored in gimple tree for omp_for.
> 
> So, you are abusing OMP_FOR_CLAUSES for shorter time, still, I agree with
> Jason that you shouldn't do that.
> 
> If you don't want to add a new clause, just use a similar existing one, if grain
> is something like scheduling chunk size, just with a different name for it, then
> using OMP_CLAUSE_SCHEDULE with OMP_CLAUSE_SCHEDULE_EXPR being
> the grain expression would be certainly cleaner.
> But even adding a new artificial clause isn't that hard.
> 

Hi Jason and Jakub,
	I used a similar existing one (safelen). Attached, please find 2 fixed patches for C and C++ along with their changelogs.

Is this OK for trunk?

Thanks,

Balaji V. Iyer.

> 	Jakub

Attachment: diff_c++.txt
Description: diff_c++.txt

Attachment: c-ChangeLog
Description: c-ChangeLog

Attachment: cp-ChangeLog
Description: cp-ChangeLog

Attachment: diff_c.txt
Description: diff_c.txt