This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH, 4/8] Add pass_tree_loop_{init,done} to pass_oacc_kernels
- From: Tom de Vries <Tom_deVries at mentor dot com>
- To: Richard Biener <rguenther at suse dot de>
- Cc: Thomas Schwinge <thomas at codesourcery dot com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2015 17:39:06 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH, 4/8] Add pass_tree_loop_{init,done} to pass_oacc_kernels
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <546743BC dot 5070804 at mentor dot com> <54678BAB dot 5000000 at mentor dot com> <54746818 dot 8020408 at mentor dot com> <87618p1cov dot fsf at kepler dot schwinge dot homeip dot net> <alpine dot LSU dot 2 dot 11 dot 1504220940070 dot 20496 at zhemvz dot fhfr dot qr> <556DB46A dot 7070506 at mentor dot com> <alpine dot LSU dot 2 dot 11 dot 1506021552030 dot 30088 at zhemvz dot fhfr dot qr>
On 02-06-15 15:58, Richard Biener wrote:
Btw, I wonder why you don't organize the oacc-kernel passes in
a new simple-IPA group after pass_local_optimization_passes.
I've placed the pass group as early as possible (meaning after ealias) and put
passes in front only when that served a purpose for parallelization (pass_fre).
The idea there was to minimize the amount of passes that have to be modified to
deal (conservatively) with a kernels region.
So AFAICT, there's nothing against placing the pass group after
pass_local_optimization_passes, other that that it's more work in more passes to
keep the region intact.
What would be the benefit of doing so?
Thanks,
- Tom