Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Turning off IVDEP for Intel 14. #638

Closed
crtrott opened this issue Feb 14, 2017 · 0 comments
Closed

Turning off IVDEP for Intel 14. #638

crtrott opened this issue Feb 14, 2017 · 0 comments
Assignees
Labels
Enhancement Improve existing capability; will potentially require voting
Milestone

Comments

@crtrott
Copy link
Member

crtrott commented Feb 14, 2017

There are reports about weird warnings about not being able to vectorize with pragma ivdep loops in Intel 14. The customers requires warnings as errors though. This is the proposed fix:

diff --git a/TPLs_src/Trilinos/packages/kokkos/core/src/Kokkos_Serial.hpp
b/TPLs_src/Trilinos/packages/kokkos/core/src/Kokkos_Serial.hpp
index 914edbc..24fde92 100644
--- a/TPLs_src/Trilinos/packages/kokkos/core/src/Kokkos_Serial.hpp
+++ b/TPLs_src/Trilinos/packages/kokkos/core/src/Kokkos_Serial.hpp
@@ -1006,7 +1006,13 @@ KOKKOS_INLINE_FUNCTION
 void parallel_for(const
Impl::ThreadVectorRangeBoundariesStruct<iType,Impl::SerialTeamMember >&
     loop_boundaries, const Lambda& lambda) {
   #ifdef KOKKOS_HAVE_PRAGMA_IVDEP
-  #pragma ivdep
+    #if defined (__INTEL_COMPILER)
+   #if (__INTEL_COMPILER > 1400)
+     #pragma ivdep
+   #endif
+    #else
+   #pragma ivdep
+    #endif
   #endif
   for( iType i = loop_boundaries.start; i < loop_boundaries.end;
i+=loop_boundaries.increment)
     lambda(i);

Instead of doing this I disable KOKKOS_HAVE_PRAGMA_IVDEP for Intel 14.

@crtrott crtrott added the Enhancement Improve existing capability; will potentially require voting label Feb 14, 2017
@crtrott crtrott added this to the 2017-February milestone Feb 14, 2017
@crtrott crtrott self-assigned this Feb 14, 2017
crtrott added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 14, 2017
@crtrott crtrott closed this as completed Apr 25, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Enhancement Improve existing capability; will potentially require voting
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants