Commit Graph

4 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Dimitry Andric 70ba8c506c Fix linking of omp_foreign_thread_team_reuse test on FreeBSD
Summary:
On FreeBSD, linking the misc_bugs/omp_foreign_thread_team_reuse.c test
case fails with:

   /usr/local/bin/ld: /tmp/omp_foreign_thread_team_reuse-c5e71b.o: undefined reference to symbol 'pthread_create@@FBSD_1.0'

This is because the program is linked without `-lpthread`.  Since the
%libomp-compile-and-run macro does not allow that option to be added to
the compile command line, split it up and add the required `-lpthread`
between %libomp-compile and %libomp-run.

Reviewers: jlpeyton, hfinkel, Hahnfeld

Subscribers: Hahnfeld, emaste, openmp-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D23084

llvm-svn: 278036
2016-08-08 18:34:05 +00:00
Hal Finkel 0a665a83da Add a test case for microtask dispatch with many arguments
This is a cleaned-up version of the test case posted in the D19879 review.

llvm-svn: 270867
2016-05-26 16:34:05 +00:00
Jonathan Peyton 1ab887d403 Allow unit testing on Windows
These changes allow testing on Windows using clang.exe.
There are two main changes:
1. Only link to -lm when it actually exists on the system
2. Create basic versions of pthread_create() and pthread_join() for windows.
   They are not POSIX compliant by any stretch but will allow any existing
   and future tests to use pthread_create() and pthread_join() for testing
   interactions of libomp with os threads.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D20391

llvm-svn: 270464
2016-05-23 17:50:32 +00:00
Jonathan Peyton 2b749b33cc Fix team reuse with foreign threads
After hot teams were enabled by default, the library started using levels kept
in the team structure. The levels are broken in case foreign thread exits and
puts its team into the pool which is then re-used by another foreign thread.
The broken behavior observed is when printing the levels for each new team, one
gets 1, 2, 1, 2, 1, 2, etc. This makes the library believe that every other
team is nested which is incorrect. What is wanted is for the levels to be
1, 1, 1, etc.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19980

llvm-svn: 269363
2016-05-12 21:54:30 +00:00