<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>тема Array notation and parallelisation в Software Archive</title>
    <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Archive/Array-notation-and-parallelisation/m-p/944327#M17873</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Does the Intel compiler currently attempt to parallelise array notation expressions?&amp;nbsp; If it does, I am failing dismally in persuading it to do so.&amp;nbsp; I use CILK_NWORKERS=4, and print both the wall clock and CPU.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;If not, what would the recommended alternative be in any case where that were desirable?&amp;nbsp; To back off to loops and use OpenMP?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Oct 2013 13:08:09 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Nick_M_3</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2013-10-02T13:08:09Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Array notation and parallelisation</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Archive/Array-notation-and-parallelisation/m-p/944327#M17873</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Does the Intel compiler currently attempt to parallelise array notation expressions?&amp;nbsp; If it does, I am failing dismally in persuading it to do so.&amp;nbsp; I use CILK_NWORKERS=4, and print both the wall clock and CPU.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;If not, what would the recommended alternative be in any case where that were desirable?&amp;nbsp; To back off to loops and use OpenMP?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Oct 2013 13:08:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Archive/Array-notation-and-parallelisation/m-p/944327#M17873</guid>
      <dc:creator>Nick_M_3</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-10-02T13:08:09Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>No, I don't believe it does. </title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Archive/Array-notation-and-parallelisation/m-p/944328#M17874</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;No, I don't believe it does.&amp;nbsp; You'll need to use an outer&amp;nbsp;loop to specify the parallelism.&amp;nbsp; Any of the parallelism frameworks will work; cilk, TBB or OpenMP, to name a few.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; - Barry&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Oct 2013 13:12:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Archive/Array-notation-and-parallelisation/m-p/944328#M17874</guid>
      <dc:creator>Barry_T_Intel</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-10-02T13:12:36Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Thanks.  Not a problem.   It</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Archive/Array-notation-and-parallelisation/m-p/944329#M17875</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thanks.&amp;nbsp; Not a problem.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; It clarifies the code, anyway, much like Fortran sections.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Oct 2013 13:16:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Archive/Array-notation-and-parallelisation/m-p/944329#M17875</guid>
      <dc:creator>Nick_M_3</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-10-02T13:16:41Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Hello,</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Archive/Array-notation-and-parallelisation/m-p/944330#M17876</link>
      <description>Hello,

I should add here that the compiler can do it for sufficiently big loops that justify the overhead of threading if "/Qparallel" or "-parallel" (auto-parallelizer) is specified. However, OpenMP runtime will be used underneath. Hence you control it with OMP_NUM_THREADS.

Best regards,

Georg Zitzlsberger</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Oct 2013 15:16:22 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Archive/Array-notation-and-parallelisation/m-p/944330#M17876</guid>
      <dc:creator>Georg_Z_Intel</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-10-02T15:16:22Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Thanks for the correction,</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Archive/Array-notation-and-parallelisation/m-p/944331#M17877</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thanks for the correction, Georg.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; - Barry&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Oct 2013 15:23:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Archive/Array-notation-and-parallelisation/m-p/944331#M17877</guid>
      <dc:creator>Barry_T_Intel</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-10-02T15:23:56Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>As mentioned above, the auto</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Archive/Array-notation-and-parallelisation/m-p/944332#M17878</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;As mentioned above, the auto-parallel options invoke OpenMP, so don't mix well with Cilk(tm) Plus.&amp;nbsp; There might even be a case for the compiler throwing a warning if cilk_for is used with auto-parallelization.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Under OpenMP 4.0, combined vectorization and threaded parallelism for a long countable for loop may be specified by&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;#pragma omp parallel for simd&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;which is implemented in icc 14.0 "XE2013 SP1"&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;With auto-parallel, it probably requires tinkering with par-threshold or writing explicit inner and outer loops.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Oct 2013 15:44:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Archive/Array-notation-and-parallelisation/m-p/944332#M17878</guid>
      <dc:creator>TimP</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-10-02T15:44:57Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Thanks very much.  I don't</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Archive/Array-notation-and-parallelisation/m-p/944333#M17879</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thanks very much.&amp;nbsp; I don't currently have access to icc 14.0, and generally avoid relying on the latest and greatest versions of compilers, because the people I deal with (and their collaborators) don't always control which version they have to use.&amp;nbsp; But I will split the OpenMP and CilkPlus usages, to minimise confusion. &lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;A warning on auto-parallelization and CilkPlus would be useful, until and unless they work together.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Oct 2013 16:17:54 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Archive/Array-notation-and-parallelisation/m-p/944333#M17879</guid>
      <dc:creator>Nick_M_3</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-10-02T16:17:54Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

