openmp: increasing of threads number decreases perfomance - c++

Question

I have this C++ code.
Loop goes throgh the matrix, finds the min element in each row and subtracts it from each element of corresponding row.
Variable myr is a summ of all min elements
Trying to parallel for:
int min = 0;
int myr = 0;
int temp[SIZE][SIZE];
int size = 0;
...//some initialization
omp_set_num_threads(1);
start_time = omp_get_wtime();
#ifdef _OPENMP
#pragma omp parallel for firstprivate(min, size) reduction(+:myr)
#endif
for(int i = 0; i < size; i++){
min = INFINITY;
for(int j = 0; j < size; j++){
if (temp[i][j] < min)
min = temp[i][j];
}
myr+=min;
for(int j = 0; j < size; j++)
temp[i][j]-=min;
}
end_time = omp_get_wtime();
if I set omp_set_num_threads(2); this part of code starts working slower.
My proc has 2 cores
Why code works slower with 2 threads?

Answer 1

There must be some aliasing or something going on. Make things simpler for OpenMP:
int const size0 = size;
#ifdef _OPENMP
#pragma omp parallel for reduction(+:myr)
#endif
for(int i = 0; i < size0; i++){
int min = INFINITY;
int * tmp = temp[i];
for(int j = 0; j < size0; j++){
if (tmp[j] < min)
min = tmp[j];
}
for(int j = 0; j < size0; j++)
tmp[j]-=min;
myr+=min;
}
That is, have most of the variables local and const if you may.

Answer 2

The parallel part can be reinterpreted as follows (I have used the snippet by #jens-gustedt, but to my experience it didn't make much difference):
#pragma omp parallel private(myr_private) shared(myr)
{
myr_private = 0;
#pragma omp for
for(int i = 0; i < size; i++){
int min = INFINITY;
int * tmp = temp[i];
for(int j = 0; j < size; j++){
if (tmp[j] < min)
min = tmp[j];
}
for(int j = 0; j < size; j++)
tmp[j]-=min;
myr_private+=min;
}
#pragma omp critical
{
myr+=myr_private;
}
}
(This interpretation is straight from http://www.openmp.org/mp-documents/OpenMP3.1.pdf Example A.36.2c).
If number of threads is n>1, there is overhead when #pragma omp parallel creates additional thread(s) and then in critical section, which all of the threads should wait for.
I have experimented with different matrix sizes and in my limited tests two threads are considerably faster with sizes above 1000, and start lagging behind with sizes below 500.