domada marked an inline comment as done.
domada added inline comments.
================
Comment at: llvm/include/llvm/Frontend/OpenMP/OMPIRBuilder.h:629
+ llvm::ArrayRef<llvm::Value *> AlignedVars,
+ llvm::Value *Alignment, Value *IfCond, ConstantInt *Simdlen,
ConstantInt *Safelen);
----------------
jdoerfert wrote:
> Aren't there different alignments possible, so X is aligned 32 and Y is
> aligned 64? If so, should we tie the Value and Alignment together in the API?
You are right. It is possible to specify multiple align clauses for single omp
clause (for example: #pragma omp simd aligned(X:32) aligned(Y:64)
================
Comment at: llvm/lib/Frontend/OpenMP/OMPIRBuilder.cpp:2976
+ const int DefaultAlignment = 16;
+
----------------
jdoerfert wrote:
> This doesn't work. Use the data layout for any default values please.
I have used pointer ABI alignment as the default value. Is it ok?
Clang has separate method to calculate OpenMP default alignment defined in
TargetInfo class ( [[
https://clang.llvm.org/doxygen/classclang_1_1TargetInfo.html#af0c75e3288adc13601732329c44db147
| link ]])
Unfortunately, there is no simple replacement of this function in OMPIRBuilder
or in Flang driver. There are some requests to expose TargetInfo data in
Clang-independent manner: [[
https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-targetinfo-library/64342 | RFC1 ]],
[[https://discourse.llvm.org/t/complex-to-libm-conversion-abi-issues/65131
|RFC2]] , but this issue is not solved.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D133578/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D133578
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
