OffTarget

Observed issues › dataenv/cce-value-dummy-target-write-visible

Appears to behave incorrectlyWrong answer · Fortran · OpenMP · Open

ftn at -O2: a target region's write to a VALUE dummy, firstprivate there, becomes visible to the host

Legality: independently confirmed. 2 independent readings find the program legal and the result required. How this is checked

Affected variants

CompilerMI300A gfx942
unified memory (XNACK 1)
MI300A gfx942
copy (XNACK 0)
MI250X gfx90a
copy (XNACK 0)
MI300X gfx942
copy (XNACK 0)
MI350X gfx950
copy (XNACK 0)
A100 sm_80
separate memory
A100 sm_80
managed memory
AFAR 24.3.0correctcorrectunknown
not run
correctcorrectn/an/a
CCE 19.0.0behaves incorrectlybehaves incorrectlyunknown
not run
unknown
not run
unknown
not run
n/an/a
CCE 20.0.2behaves incorrectlybehaves incorrectlyunknown
not run
unknown
not run
unknown
not run
n/an/a
CCE 21.0.3behaves incorrectlybehaves incorrectlyunknown
not run
unknown
not run
unknown
not run
n/an/a
CCE 21.0.4behaves incorrectlybehaves incorrectlyunknown
not run
unknown
not run
unknown
not run
n/an/a
NVHPC 25.11n/an/an/an/an/acorrectcorrect
NVHPC 26.9n/an/an/an/an/acorrectcorrect
GCC 16.2.0correctcorrectcorrectcorrectcorrectcorrectn/a

"behaves incorrectly" / "not supported": this issue, confirmed in up to four environments (another build directory, another node, a repeat). "fails another way": a different failure, not counted as this issue. "unknown": not run there, or the runs disagree.

Messages

ResultCompiler and GPUMessage
behaves incorrectlyCCE 19.0.0, MI300A unified
CCE 19.0.0, MI300A copy
CCE 20.0.2, MI300A unified
CCE 20.0.2, MI300A copy
CCE 21.0.3, MI300A unified
CCE 21.0.3, MI300A copy
CCE 21.0.4, MI300A unified
CCE 21.0.4, MI300A copy
show
rd= 5 vout= 203 dev= 1

Reproduce

CCE 19.0.0, MI300A unified

module load cce/19.0.0 craype-accel-amd-gfx942 rocm/6.4.3
module unload cray-mpich
ftn -fopenmp -O2 repro.f90 -o repro
HSA_XNACK=1 OMP_TARGET_OFFLOAD=mandatory ./repro

CCE 20.0.2, MI300A unified

module load cce/20.0.2 craype-accel-amd-gfx942 rocm/6.4.3
module unload cray-mpich
ftn -fopenmp -O2 repro.f90 -o repro
HSA_XNACK=1 OMP_TARGET_OFFLOAD=mandatory ./repro

CCE 21.0.3, MI300A unified

module load cce/21.0.3 craype-accel-amd-gfx942 rocm/7.2.0
module unload cray-mpich
ftn -fopenmp -O2 repro.f90 -o repro
HSA_XNACK=1 OMP_TARGET_OFFLOAD=mandatory ./repro

CCE 21.0.4, MI300A unified

module load cce/21.0.4 craype-accel-amd-gfx942 rocm/7.2.0
module unload cray-mpich
ftn -fopenmp -O2 repro.f90 -o repro
HSA_XNACK=1 OMP_TARGET_OFFLOAD=mandatory ./repro

AFAR 24.3.0, MI300A unified (runs correctly)

$AFAR/bin/amdflang -fopenmp --offload-arch=gfx942 -O2 repro.f90 -o repro
HSA_XNACK=1 OMP_TARGET_OFFLOAD=mandatory ./repro
Program (71 lines)
! # Finding: at -O2, CCE ftn 19/20/21 make a target region's write to a VALUE dummy
! # visible to the host (no transfer of the dummy; it is firstprivate in the region)
!
! - compilers: CCE ftn 19.0.0, 20.0.2, 21.0.3 (MI300A gfx942), -O2 and -O3, HSA_XNACK 0 and 1
! - expected: rd= 5 vout= 101 dev= 1
! - actual: rd= 5 vout= 203 dev= 1 (every run: 3 repeats per cell, CCE 19/20/21 x XNACK 0/1 x -O2/-O3)
! - rule: v is a scalar dummy with the VALUE attribute, without the TARGET, ALLOCATABLE or POINTER attribute,
!   in no clause of the target construct, so it is not mapped: "If the above rules do not apply then a
!   scalar variable is not mapped but instead has an implicit data-sharing attribute of firstprivate"
!   (OpenMP 5.2 §5.8.1 p.149 l.8-9; 5.0 §2.19.7 p.315 l.9-10; 6.0 §7.9.3 p.277 l.22-23), and "In a target
!   construct, variables that are not mapped after applying data-mapping attribute rules (see Section 5.8)
!   are firstprivate" (5.2 §5.1.1 p.99 l.19-20). The region's v = 2*v + 1 writes its private copy, so the
!   procedure's v is still 101 after the region and vout = v returns 101. (A VALUE scalar is Fortran 2003;
!   OpenMP 5.0 §1.7 lists only the Fortran 2008 extension of VALUE as unspecified.)
! - what happens (not a map and not a copy-back): with CRAY_ACC_DEBUG=2 (CCE 19, HSA_XNACK 0) the -O2 build
!   of results/dataenv/probe_fr1/vd_write.f90 (this program without its header and its dev region)
!   launches `p_$ck_L23_3` from the call site at its line 23 (sub is inlined into the main program) and
!   transfers only `r` ("allocate 'r'", then "copy to host, free 'r'"); nothing of v is transferred, yet
!   the host reads 203. The -O0 build launches `sub_$ck_L6_1`, transfers the same `r`, and the host reads
!   101.
!   (trace: results/dataenv/probe_fr1/trace.out; review, section 5)
! - conditions (each a one-change variant, CCE 19/20/21, HSA_XNACK 0 and 1, results/dataenv/probe_fr1/):
!   - correct at -O0 and -O1; wrong at -O2 and -O3;
!   - correct when the region only reads v (r = v);
!   - correct when the region also calls omp_is_initial_device();
!   - wrong with sub a module procedure too (the generator's form, the trial's 9 CCE cells, gfx942 and
!     gfx90a, both modes: results/dataenv/pilot_all/).
! - same-compiler controls (all correct, -O2): firstprivate(v) on the target construct; v a by-reference
!   intent(inout) dummy instead of VALUE; a local copy u = v written in the region instead of v.
! - other families: AFAR amdflang 24.0.0git (drop 24.3.0) correct on this file at -O0 to -O3, both modes;
!   NVHPC 25.11 and 26.9 (A100, separate and managed) correct on the generator's module-procedure form
!   (the trial's rows); this file was not run on NVHPC.
! - legality: offload.engine.prerun.check accepts it (offload.engine.rules with the race rule, and the AFAR flang
!   front end); the region is executed by one initial thread; no compiler under test, gfortran or gcc is a
!   legality witness.
! - found by: the data-environment rule sample, rule omp-target-value-dummy-firstprivate
!   (catalog/dataenv_rules.yaml); gate verdict confirmed on all 9 CCE cells.
!   This is the 22-line reproducer.
! CCE:  ftn -fopenmp -O2 (module load cce/<v> craype-accel-amd-gfx942 rocm/<r>; module unload cray-mpich)
! AFAR: amdflang -fopenmp --offload-arch=gfx942 -O2
! Run:  OMP_TARGET_OFFLOAD=mandatory ./a.out
subroutine sub(v, rd, vout)
  integer, value :: v
  integer, intent(out) :: rd, vout
  integer :: r
  r = -1
  !$omp target map(from: r)
    v = 2*v + 1
    r = 5
  !$omp end target
  rd = r
  vout = v          ! CCE 19/20/21 -O2: 203; expected 101
end subroutine sub

program value_dummy_target_write
  use omp_lib, only: omp_is_initial_device
  implicit none
  interface
    subroutine sub(v, rd, vout)
      integer, value :: v
      integer, intent(out) :: rd, vout
    end subroutine sub
  end interface
  integer :: rd, vout, dev
  dev = -1
  !$omp target map(from: dev)
    dev = merge(0, 1, omp_is_initial_device())
  !$omp end target
  call sub(101, rd, vout)
  print '(a,i0,a,i0,a,i0)', 'rd= ', rd, ' vout= ', vout, ' dev= ', dev
end program value_dummy_target_write

Source in the repository

Something to add? Dispute its legality · Report it fixed in a newer release · Report a mistake on this page

Expected and observed

Expected

rd= 5 vout= 101 dev= 1

Observed where it behaves incorrectly

rd= 5 vout= 203 dev= 1

What the specification requires

The specification text this program relies on and the compiler is expected to support.

OpenMP 5.2 §5.8.1 p.149 l.8-9

If the above rules do not apply then a scalar variable is not mapped but instead has an implicit data-sharing attribute of firstprivate

OpenMP 5.0 §2.19.7 p.315 l.9-10

OpenMP 6.0 §7.9.3 p.277 l.22-23

OpenMP 5.2 §5.1.1 p.99 l.19-20

In a target construct, variables that are not mapped after applying data-mapping attribute rules (see Section 5.8) are firstprivate

OpenMP 5.0 §1.7

Evidence

Other compilers run it correctly

AFAR 24.3.0, NVHPC 25.11, NVHPC 26.9, GCC 16.2.0