Page MenuHomePhabricator

cchen (Chi Chun Chen)
User

Projects

User does not belong to any projects.

User Details

User Since
Aug 21 2019, 11:47 AM (66 w, 1 d)

Recent Activity

Tue, Nov 24

cchen abandoned D91998: [OpenMP50][DOCS] Mark target data non-contiguous as done, NFC..
Tue, Nov 24, 2:08 PM · Restricted Project
cchen committed rG77e98eaee2e8: [OpenMP50][DOCS] Mark target data non-contiguous as done, NFC. (authored by cchen).
[OpenMP50][DOCS] Mark target data non-contiguous as done, NFC.
Tue, Nov 24, 2:08 PM
cchen added a comment to D91998: [OpenMP50][DOCS] Mark target data non-contiguous as done, NFC..

I think I'll just land it since it's an nfc.

Tue, Nov 24, 2:04 PM · Restricted Project

Mon, Nov 23

cchen requested review of D91998: [OpenMP50][DOCS] Mark target data non-contiguous as done, NFC..
Mon, Nov 23, 1:59 PM · Restricted Project

Thu, Nov 19

cchen committed rG7036fe8a0cff: [libomptarget] Add support for target update non-contiguous (authored by cchen).
[libomptarget] Add support for target update non-contiguous
Thu, Nov 19, 9:34 AM
cchen closed D82245: [libomptarget] Add support for target update non-contiguous.
Thu, Nov 19, 9:33 AM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project
cchen updated the diff for D82245: [libomptarget] Add support for target update non-contiguous.

Refactor target_data_update

Thu, Nov 19, 8:48 AM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project
cchen added a comment to D82245: [libomptarget] Add support for target update non-contiguous.

Would you please take a thorough check with your patch? I can still find many code that still don't conform with the standard. Thanks. The test case is fine as we don't have unified standard.

Thu, Nov 19, 7:05 AM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project

Wed, Nov 18

cchen updated the diff for D82245: [libomptarget] Add support for target update non-contiguous.

Update style

Wed, Nov 18, 2:07 PM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project
cchen committed rG7046be17307d: [OpenMP] [DOCS] Update OMP5.1 feature status table [NFC] (authored by dreachem).
[OpenMP] [DOCS] Update OMP5.1 feature status table [NFC]
Wed, Nov 18, 8:47 AM
cchen closed D90802: [OpenMP] [DOCS] Update OMP5.1 feature status table [NFC].
Wed, Nov 18, 8:47 AM · Restricted Project

Tue, Nov 17

cchen updated the diff for D82245: [libomptarget] Add support for target update non-contiguous.

Apply LLVM coding style

Tue, Nov 17, 1:02 PM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project

Tue, Nov 10

cchen added a comment to D82245: [libomptarget] Add support for target update non-contiguous.

Fix coding style

I'm not sure whether this is still WIP because I didn't see any change in the touched code.

Tue, Nov 10, 12:02 PM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project

Mon, Nov 9

cchen updated the diff for D82245: [libomptarget] Add support for target update non-contiguous.

Fix coding style

Mon, Nov 9, 10:09 AM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project
cchen added inline comments to D82245: [libomptarget] Add support for target update non-contiguous.
Mon, Nov 9, 9:43 AM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project
cchen updated the diff for D82245: [libomptarget] Add support for target update non-contiguous.

Fix build error

Mon, Nov 9, 9:22 AM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project

Fri, Nov 6

cchen added inline comments to D84192: [OpenMP5.0] map item can be non-contiguous for target update.
Fri, Nov 6, 8:25 PM · Restricted Project
cchen committed rG0cab91140f61: [OpenMP5.0] map item can be non-contiguous for target update (authored by cchen).
[OpenMP5.0] map item can be non-contiguous for target update
Fri, Nov 6, 7:05 PM
cchen closed D84192: [OpenMP5.0] map item can be non-contiguous for target update.
Fri, Nov 6, 7:05 PM · Restricted Project
cchen committed rG6847bcec1aa9: [libomptarget] Add support for target update non-contiguous (authored by cchen).
[libomptarget] Add support for target update non-contiguous
Fri, Nov 6, 6:56 PM
cchen closed D82245: [libomptarget] Add support for target update non-contiguous.
Fri, Nov 6, 6:55 PM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project
cchen updated the diff for D84192: [OpenMP5.0] map item can be non-contiguous for target update.

Rebase

Fri, Nov 6, 10:19 AM · Restricted Project

Thu, Nov 5

cchen added a comment to D82245: [libomptarget] Add support for target update non-contiguous.

The link in the description for the clang patch is outdated (that patch has been abandoned), can you replace it with https://reviews.llvm.org/D84192? Thanks!

Thu, Nov 5, 2:04 PM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project
cchen updated the summary of D82245: [libomptarget] Add support for target update non-contiguous.
Thu, Nov 5, 1:24 PM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project
cchen updated the diff for D82245: [libomptarget] Add support for target update non-contiguous.

Rebase and fix based on feedback

Thu, Nov 5, 11:02 AM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project

Wed, Nov 4

cchen committed rGd0d43b58b109: [OpenMP] target nested `use_device_ptr() if()` and is_device_ptr trigger asserts (authored by cchen).
[OpenMP] target nested `use_device_ptr() if()` and is_device_ptr trigger asserts
Wed, Nov 4, 10:37 AM
cchen closed D90704: [OpenMP] target nested `use_device_ptr() if()` and is_device_ptr trigger asserts.
Wed, Nov 4, 10:37 AM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project
cchen updated the diff for D90704: [OpenMP] target nested `use_device_ptr() if()` and is_device_ptr trigger asserts.

Refactor

Wed, Nov 4, 10:30 AM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project
cchen updated the diff for D90704: [OpenMP] target nested `use_device_ptr() if()` and is_device_ptr trigger asserts.

Fix coding style

Wed, Nov 4, 10:03 AM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project
cchen updated the diff for D90704: [OpenMP] target nested `use_device_ptr() if()` and is_device_ptr trigger asserts.

Fix based on feedback

Wed, Nov 4, 10:01 AM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project
cchen added inline comments to D90704: [OpenMP] target nested `use_device_ptr() if()` and is_device_ptr trigger asserts.
Wed, Nov 4, 9:45 AM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project
cchen added inline comments to D90704: [OpenMP] target nested `use_device_ptr() if()` and is_device_ptr trigger asserts.
Wed, Nov 4, 9:37 AM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project

Tue, Nov 3

cchen added a comment to D90704: [OpenMP] target nested `use_device_ptr() if()` and is_device_ptr trigger asserts.

It would be good if you could identify the object which leads to a crash, I mean a target region, variable, etc.

Tue, Nov 3, 3:25 PM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project
cchen added a comment to D90704: [OpenMP] target nested `use_device_ptr() if()` and is_device_ptr trigger asserts.

I do not understand the commit message. Can you try to make it clearer?

Tue, Nov 3, 1:22 PM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project
cchen updated the summary of D90704: [OpenMP] target nested `use_device_ptr() if()` and is_device_ptr trigger asserts.
Tue, Nov 3, 1:20 PM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project
cchen updated the summary of D90704: [OpenMP] target nested `use_device_ptr() if()` and is_device_ptr trigger asserts.
Tue, Nov 3, 1:18 PM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project
cchen updated the diff for D90704: [OpenMP] target nested `use_device_ptr() if()` and is_device_ptr trigger asserts.

Separate test to a independent file

Tue, Nov 3, 1:17 PM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project
cchen requested review of D90704: [OpenMP] target nested `use_device_ptr() if()` and is_device_ptr trigger asserts.
Tue, Nov 3, 11:50 AM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project

Oct 2 2020

cchen added a comment to D74144: [OPENMP50]Add basic support for array-shaping operation..

@ABataev, the below test is extracted from Sollve test suite and Clang now emit:

test.c:17:35: error: subscripted value is not an array or pointer
    #pragma omp target update to( (([N][N])foo)[1:M] )
                                  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
test.c:17:5: error: expected at least one 'to' clause or 'from' clause specified to '#pragma omp target update'
    #pragma omp target update to( (([N][N])foo)[1:M] )

This error message came from the ActOnOMPArraySectionExpr which is called inside ParsePostfixExpressionSuffix. The issue is that the base expression in ActOnOMPArraySectionExpr looks like:

ParenExpr 0x122859be0 '<OpenMP array shaping type>' lvalue
`-OMPArrayShapingExpr 0x122859b98 '<OpenMP array shaping type>' lvalue
  |-IntegerLiteral 0x122859b38 'int' 5
  |-IntegerLiteral 0x122859b58 'int' 5
  `-DeclRefExpr 0x122859b78 'int *' lvalue Var 0x1228599d0 'foo' 'int *'

which is not a base that we would expect in an array section expr. I've tried relaxing the base type check in ActOnOMPArraySectionExpr but not sure it's the way to go. (or should I just extract the DeclReExpr from ArrayShapingExpr before calling ActOnOMPArraySectionExpr?)

#define N 5
#define M 3

int main(void) {
    int tmp[N][N];
    for(int i=0; i<N; i++)
        for(int j=0; j<N; j++)
            tmp[i][j] = N*i + j;

    int *foo = &tmp[0][0];

    // This compiles just fine
    //#pragma omp target update to( ([N][N])foo )

    // This is rejected by the compiler
    #pragma omp target update to( (([N][N])foo)[1:M] )
}

I don't think it is allowed by the standard.

According to the standard, The shape-operator can appear only in clauses where it is explicitly allowed.
In this case, array shaping is used as a base expression of array section (or subscript) expression, which does not meet the standard. Tje array sjaping operation is not used in clause, instead it is used as a base subexpression of another expression.

Oct 2 2020, 9:07 AM · Restricted Project

Oct 1 2020

cchen added a comment to D74144: [OPENMP50]Add basic support for array-shaping operation..

@ABataev, the below test is extracted from Sollve test suite and Clang now emit:

test.c:17:35: error: subscripted value is not an array or pointer
    #pragma omp target update to( (([N][N])foo)[1:M] )
                                  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
test.c:17:5: error: expected at least one 'to' clause or 'from' clause specified to '#pragma omp target update'
    #pragma omp target update to( (([N][N])foo)[1:M] )

This error message came from the ActOnOMPArraySectionExpr which is called inside ParsePostfixExpressionSuffix. The issue is that the base expression in ActOnOMPArraySectionExpr looks like:

ParenExpr 0x122859be0 '<OpenMP array shaping type>' lvalue
`-OMPArrayShapingExpr 0x122859b98 '<OpenMP array shaping type>' lvalue
  |-IntegerLiteral 0x122859b38 'int' 5
  |-IntegerLiteral 0x122859b58 'int' 5
  `-DeclRefExpr 0x122859b78 'int *' lvalue Var 0x1228599d0 'foo' 'int *'

which is not a base that we would expect in an array section expr. I've tried relaxing the base type check in ActOnOMPArraySectionExpr but not sure it's the way to go. (or should I just extract the DeclReExpr from ArrayShapingExpr before calling ActOnOMPArraySectionExpr?)

Oct 1 2020, 3:50 PM · Restricted Project

Aug 21 2020

cchen accepted D86239: [OPENMP]Fix PR47158, case 3: allow devic_typein nested declare target region..

LGTM

Aug 21 2020, 11:18 AM · Restricted Project

Aug 18 2020

cchen added a comment to D83261: [OPENMP]Redesign of OMPExecutableDirective representation..

In PR45212 comment 5 (https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45212#c5), there is a reduced test case that failed after adding this patch. The assertion is from OMPChildren::getInnermostCapturedStmt.

Aug 18 2020, 12:41 PM · Restricted Project

Aug 7 2020

cchen committed rG3adc9aeb250c: [OpenMP 5.0] Fix PR-45212: Shouldn't error out while using overloaded operator… (authored by cchen).
[OpenMP 5.0] Fix PR-45212: Shouldn't error out while using overloaded operator…
Aug 7 2020, 4:08 PM
cchen closed D85563: [OpenMP 5.0] Fix PR-45212: Shouldn't error out while using overloaded operator for map clause.
Aug 7 2020, 4:08 PM · Restricted Project
cchen retitled D85563: [OpenMP 5.0] Fix PR-45212: Shouldn't error out while using overloaded operator for map clause from [OpenMP 5.0] Fix PR-45212 - Shouldn't error out while using overloaded operator for map clause to [OpenMP 5.0] Fix PR-45212: Shouldn't error out while using overloaded operator for map clause.
Aug 7 2020, 3:57 PM · Restricted Project
cchen updated the diff for D85563: [OpenMP 5.0] Fix PR-45212: Shouldn't error out while using overloaded operator for map clause.

Fix commit message

Aug 7 2020, 3:56 PM · Restricted Project
cchen requested review of D85563: [OpenMP 5.0] Fix PR-45212: Shouldn't error out while using overloaded operator for map clause.
Aug 7 2020, 3:50 PM · Restricted Project

Jul 31 2020

cchen added a comment to D82245: [libomptarget] Add support for target update non-contiguous.

ping

Jul 31 2020, 12:43 PM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project

Jul 24 2020

cchen added a comment to D82245: [libomptarget] Add support for target update non-contiguous.

Ping, compiler support is in this patch: https://reviews.llvm.org/D84192.

Jul 24 2020, 9:16 AM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project
cchen added a comment to D84192: [OpenMP5.0] map item can be non-contiguous for target update.

@ABataev, do I need to wait for the runtime patch to commit this one? If so, do you have some recommend reviewers for me to add to that patch? I have pinged several times for that patch but haven't got many reviews for it. Thanks!

Jul 24 2020, 9:06 AM · Restricted Project
cchen updated the diff for D84192: [OpenMP5.0] map item can be non-contiguous for target update.

Fix coding style and argument on getIntTypeForBitwidth

Jul 24 2020, 8:54 AM · Restricted Project
cchen added a comment to D84192: [OpenMP5.0] map item can be non-contiguous for target update.

@ABataev, is there any other concern for this patch?

Jul 24 2020, 8:36 AM · Restricted Project

Jul 22 2020

cchen abandoned D69316: [OpenMP 5.0] target update list items need not be contiguous (Sema).
Jul 22 2020, 1:50 PM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project
cchen added a comment to D84192: [OpenMP5.0] map item can be non-contiguous for target update.

Also, what about compatibility with declare mapper? Can you add tests for it?

There's a restriction for map clause that non-contiguous is not allowed and I guess it also applies to declare mapper.

I see that to/from clauses allow to use mappers too:

to([mapper(mapper-identifier):]locator-list) from([mapper(mapper-identifier):]locator-list

I'm confused of how to use to([mapper(mapper-identifier):]locator-list) with array section.
For this case:

class C {
public:
  int a;
  double b[3][4][5];
};

#pragma omp declare mapper(id: C s) map(s.a, s.b[0:3][0:4][0:5])

#pragma omp target update from(mapper(id): c)

Clang already has a semantic check in from clause when mapper is used: "mapper type must be of struct, union or class type".
So the only item I can put in from clause in the above example is c and I cannot put c.b[0:2][1:2][0:2] or any even c.b[0:2].

Does clang compile your example? If not, shall it be allowed for to/from clauses or not?

Clang can compile my example but the problem is that Clang do not accept something like #pragma omp target update from(mapper(id): c.b[0:2][1:2][2:2]) (non-contiguous) or even #pragma omp target update from(mapper(id): c.b[2][1][0:2]) (contiguous).
Actually, Clang now only accepts c as struct/union/class type in from(mapper(id): c). And the reason for the restriction is from declare mapper directive - "The type must be of struct, union or class type in C and C++".

And it is fine. How does it work in declare mapper, the main question? Does it support extended array sections format mapoers with maps, to and from? Shall it be supported in declare mapper at all?

After discussing with @dreachem, my understanding is that it is not incorrect to not allowing extended/non-contiguous array section to appear in declare mapper.
For the declare mapper directive, since spec only allows map clause, extended array section (with stride) or non-contiguous array section are both not allowed.
For using the mapper in map/to/from clause, if mapping or updating an array section of type T, where there is a mapper declared for T, then the mapper needs to apply as if to each element of the array or array section. Spec is intentionally not sufficiently clear on this for target update so the semantic check in Clang is not incorrect. Which lead to the fact that I might not need to support extended/non-contiguous array section for declare mapper.

What exactly is incorrect in clang sema?

Jul 22 2020, 12:20 PM · Restricted Project
cchen added a comment to D84192: [OpenMP5.0] map item can be non-contiguous for target update.

Also, what about compatibility with declare mapper? Can you add tests for it?

There's a restriction for map clause that non-contiguous is not allowed and I guess it also applies to declare mapper.

I see that to/from clauses allow to use mappers too:

to([mapper(mapper-identifier):]locator-list) from([mapper(mapper-identifier):]locator-list

I'm confused of how to use to([mapper(mapper-identifier):]locator-list) with array section.
For this case:

class C {
public:
  int a;
  double b[3][4][5];
};

#pragma omp declare mapper(id: C s) map(s.a, s.b[0:3][0:4][0:5])

#pragma omp target update from(mapper(id): c)

Clang already has a semantic check in from clause when mapper is used: "mapper type must be of struct, union or class type".
So the only item I can put in from clause in the above example is c and I cannot put c.b[0:2][1:2][0:2] or any even c.b[0:2].

Does clang compile your example? If not, shall it be allowed for to/from clauses or not?

Clang can compile my example but the problem is that Clang do not accept something like #pragma omp target update from(mapper(id): c.b[0:2][1:2][2:2]) (non-contiguous) or even #pragma omp target update from(mapper(id): c.b[2][1][0:2]) (contiguous).
Actually, Clang now only accepts c as struct/union/class type in from(mapper(id): c). And the reason for the restriction is from declare mapper directive - "The type must be of struct, union or class type in C and C++".

And it is fine. How does it work in declare mapper, the main question? Does it support extended array sections format mapoers with maps, to and from? Shall it be supported in declare mapper at all?

Jul 22 2020, 12:15 PM · Restricted Project

Jul 21 2020

cchen added a comment to D84192: [OpenMP5.0] map item can be non-contiguous for target update.

Also, what about compatibility with declare mapper? Can you add tests for it?

There's a restriction for map clause that non-contiguous is not allowed and I guess it also applies to declare mapper.

I see that to/from clauses allow to use mappers too:

to([mapper(mapper-identifier):]locator-list) from([mapper(mapper-identifier):]locator-list

I'm confused of how to use to([mapper(mapper-identifier):]locator-list) with array section.
For this case:

class C {
public:
  int a;
  double b[3][4][5];
};

#pragma omp declare mapper(id: C s) map(s.a, s.b[0:3][0:4][0:5])

#pragma omp target update from(mapper(id): c)

Clang already has a semantic check in from clause when mapper is used: "mapper type must be of struct, union or class type".
So the only item I can put in from clause in the above example is c and I cannot put c.b[0:2][1:2][0:2] or any even c.b[0:2].

Does clang compile your example? If not, shall it be allowed for to/from clauses or not?

Jul 21 2020, 3:52 PM · Restricted Project
cchen added a comment to D84192: [OpenMP5.0] map item can be non-contiguous for target update.

Also, what about compatibility with declare mapper? Can you add tests for it?

There's a restriction for map clause that non-contiguous is not allowed and I guess it also applies to declare mapper.

I see that to/from clauses allow to use mappers too:

to([mapper(mapper-identifier):]locator-list) from([mapper(mapper-identifier):]locator-list
Jul 21 2020, 2:59 PM · Restricted Project
cchen added a comment to D84192: [OpenMP5.0] map item can be non-contiguous for target update.

Also, what about compatibility with declare mapper? Can you add tests for it?

There's a restriction for map clause that non-contiguous is not allowed and I guess it also applies to declare mapper.

I see that to/from clauses allow to use mappers too:

to([mapper(mapper-identifier):]locator-list) from([mapper(mapper-identifier):]locator-list
Jul 21 2020, 2:20 PM · Restricted Project
cchen updated the diff for D84192: [OpenMP5.0] map item can be non-contiguous for target update.

Fix based on feedback

Jul 21 2020, 2:04 PM · Restricted Project
cchen added a comment to D84192: [OpenMP5.0] map item can be non-contiguous for target update.

Also, what about compatibility with declare mapper? Can you add tests for it?

Jul 21 2020, 2:03 PM · Restricted Project

Jul 20 2020

cchen abandoned D79972: [OpenMP5.0] map item can be non-contiguous for target update.

Created a new patch with the support for stride: https://reviews.llvm.org/D84192.

Jul 20 2020, 9:16 PM · Restricted Project
cchen updated the diff for D82245: [libomptarget] Add support for target update non-contiguous.

Modify test for supporting stride in target update non-contiguous

Jul 20 2020, 9:16 PM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project
Herald added a project to D84192: [OpenMP5.0] map item can be non-contiguous for target update: Restricted Project.
Jul 20 2020, 9:16 PM · Restricted Project

Jul 9 2020

cchen added a reviewer for D82245: [libomptarget] Add support for target update non-contiguous: AndreyChurbanov.
Jul 9 2020, 12:13 PM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project
cchen committed rG2da9572a9b10: [OPENMP50] extend array section for stride (Parsing/Sema/AST) (authored by cchen).
[OPENMP50] extend array section for stride (Parsing/Sema/AST)
Jul 9 2020, 11:35 AM
cchen closed D82800: [OPENMP50] extend array section for stride (Parsing/Sema/AST).
Jul 9 2020, 11:34 AM · Restricted Project
cchen added a comment to D82800: [OPENMP50] extend array section for stride (Parsing/Sema/AST).

@ABataev , can you commit this patch for me when you have time? Thanks.

I think you can request commit access from Chris Lattner and commit it yourself.

Jul 9 2020, 8:52 AM · Restricted Project
cchen added a comment to D82800: [OPENMP50] extend array section for stride (Parsing/Sema/AST).

@ABataev , can you commit this patch for me when you have time? Thanks.

Jul 9 2020, 8:34 AM · Restricted Project

Jul 8 2020

cchen updated the diff for D82800: [OPENMP50] extend array section for stride (Parsing/Sema/AST).

Fix message and rebase

Jul 8 2020, 3:59 PM · Restricted Project
cchen added a comment to rG90b54fa045e3: [OPENMP50]Codegen for use_device_addr clauses..

Not sure whether I should put it here or Bugzilla. I found there is an internal compiler error for both use_device_ptr and use_device_addr both when running on host (clang -fopenmp -fopenmp-version=50 test.c).

Jul 8 2020, 2:51 PM

Jul 7 2020

cchen added inline comments to D82800: [OPENMP50] extend array section for stride (Parsing/Sema/AST).
Jul 7 2020, 1:07 PM · Restricted Project
cchen added inline comments to D82800: [OPENMP50] extend array section for stride (Parsing/Sema/AST).
Jul 7 2020, 12:54 PM · Restricted Project

Jul 6 2020

cchen updated the diff for D82800: [OPENMP50] extend array section for stride (Parsing/Sema/AST).

Fix based on comment

Jul 6 2020, 4:00 PM · Restricted Project
cchen updated the diff for D82800: [OPENMP50] extend array section for stride (Parsing/Sema/AST).

Move analysis of stride from Sema to Parse

Jul 6 2020, 2:35 PM · Restricted Project
cchen added inline comments to D82800: [OPENMP50] extend array section for stride (Parsing/Sema/AST).
Jul 6 2020, 11:28 AM · Restricted Project
cchen added inline comments to D82800: [OPENMP50] extend array section for stride (Parsing/Sema/AST).
Jul 6 2020, 10:14 AM · Restricted Project
cchen added a comment to D82245: [libomptarget] Add support for target update non-contiguous.

ping

Jul 6 2020, 10:03 AM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project

Jul 2 2020

cchen updated the diff for D82800: [OPENMP50] extend array section for stride (Parsing/Sema/AST).

Fix based on feedback

Jul 2 2020, 2:36 PM · Restricted Project
cchen updated the diff for D82800: [OPENMP50] extend array section for stride (Parsing/Sema/AST).

Rebase

Jul 2 2020, 12:57 PM · Restricted Project

Jul 1 2020

cchen added reviewers for D82245: [libomptarget] Add support for target update non-contiguous: hfinkel, Meinersbur, kkwli0, Hahnfeld.
Jul 1 2020, 2:36 PM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project

Jun 30 2020

cchen added a comment to D79972: [OpenMP5.0] map item can be non-contiguous for target update.

@ABataev , I'm considering emitting an extra dimension for a non-contiguous descriptor to support stride in this patch (stride = 1 in array section is just a special case for computing stride, however, the formula computing stride do not change). Do you think I should do it in this patch?

Jun 30 2020, 3:46 PM · Restricted Project
cchen added inline comments to D79972: [OpenMP5.0] map item can be non-contiguous for target update.
Jun 30 2020, 10:18 AM · Restricted Project

Jun 29 2020

cchen updated the diff for D82800: [OPENMP50] extend array section for stride (Parsing/Sema/AST).
  1. Remove a commit that is not on master branch
  2. Add a rule in Sema to avoid non-contiguous array section for map clause
  3. Add tests
Jun 29 2020, 4:06 PM · Restricted Project
cchen added inline comments to D82800: [OPENMP50] extend array section for stride (Parsing/Sema/AST).
Jun 29 2020, 1:36 PM · Restricted Project
cchen updated the diff for D82800: [OPENMP50] extend array section for stride (Parsing/Sema/AST).

Revert unnecessary changes made by bot

Jun 29 2020, 1:01 PM · Restricted Project
cchen created D82800: [OPENMP50] extend array section for stride (Parsing/Sema/AST).
Jun 29 2020, 12:28 PM · Restricted Project
cchen added a comment to D82245: [libomptarget] Add support for target update non-contiguous.

ping

Jun 29 2020, 12:28 PM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project

Jun 26 2020

cchen updated the diff for D79972: [OpenMP5.0] map item can be non-contiguous for target update.

Rebase and resolve conflictions

Jun 26 2020, 10:55 AM · Restricted Project
cchen updated the diff for D79972: [OpenMP5.0] map item can be non-contiguous for target update.

Fix based on feedback

Jun 26 2020, 8:44 AM · Restricted Project

Jun 25 2020

cchen updated the diff for D79972: [OpenMP5.0] map item can be non-contiguous for target update.

Pass Info directly

Jun 25 2020, 3:18 PM · Restricted Project
cchen updated the diff for D79972: [OpenMP5.0] map item can be non-contiguous for target update.

Fix based on feedback

Jun 25 2020, 2:44 PM · Restricted Project
cchen added inline comments to D79972: [OpenMP5.0] map item can be non-contiguous for target update.
Jun 25 2020, 1:39 PM · Restricted Project
cchen added inline comments to D79972: [OpenMP5.0] map item can be non-contiguous for target update.
Jun 25 2020, 1:39 PM · Restricted Project
cchen updated the diff for D82245: [libomptarget] Add support for target update non-contiguous.

Fix non_contig type

Jun 25 2020, 1:39 PM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project
cchen updated the diff for D79972: [OpenMP5.0] map item can be non-contiguous for target update.

Fix coding style

Jun 25 2020, 1:05 PM · Restricted Project
cchen added a comment to D79972: [OpenMP5.0] map item can be non-contiguous for target update.

ping

Jun 25 2020, 9:40 AM · Restricted Project

Jun 24 2020

cchen updated the diff for D82245: [libomptarget] Add support for target update non-contiguous.

Update test so that it don't depends on compiler generated code

Jun 24 2020, 2:40 PM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project
cchen updated the diff for D82245: [libomptarget] Add support for target update non-contiguous.

Revert llvm pre-merge lint for existing code

Jun 24 2020, 1:34 PM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project
cchen updated the diff for D82245: [libomptarget] Add support for target update non-contiguous.

Update test

Jun 24 2020, 1:01 PM · Restricted Project, Restricted Project

Jun 22 2020

cchen added a comment to D79972: [OpenMP5.0] map item can be non-contiguous for target update.

How do you plan to support
#pragma omp target update to (arr[1:2][1:2][0:2], x, b[1:5][0:2])
Are you going to split this into 3 updates since your are using the arg fields.

Jun 22 2020, 4:10 PM · Restricted Project