Author: erichkeane Date: 2024-06-05T13:27:10-07:00 New Revision: e675d0d5cd4047bcf4ec368d2b4c19a57e5347f3
URL: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/e675d0d5cd4047bcf4ec368d2b4c19a57e5347f3 DIFF: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/e675d0d5cd4047bcf4ec368d2b4c19a57e5347f3.diff LOG: [OpenACC][NFC] Refactor SemaOpenACC to use a visitor This code was getting unwieldy, so a quick patch to refactor it a bit. Added: Modified: clang/include/clang/AST/OpenACCClause.h clang/include/clang/Basic/OpenACCClauses.def clang/lib/AST/OpenACCClause.cpp clang/lib/Sema/SemaOpenACC.cpp Removed: ################################################################################ diff --git a/clang/include/clang/AST/OpenACCClause.h b/clang/include/clang/AST/OpenACCClause.h index a4c82cdad87bd..ea1ffbc7fd08b 100644 --- a/clang/include/clang/AST/OpenACCClause.h +++ b/clang/include/clang/AST/OpenACCClause.h @@ -867,7 +867,7 @@ template <class Impl> class OpenACCClauseVisitor { case OpenACCClauseKind::CLAUSE_NAME: \ Visit##CLAUSE_NAME##Clause(*cast<OpenACC##CLAUSE_NAME##Clause>(C)); \ return; -#define CLAUSE_ALIAS(ALIAS_NAME, CLAUSE_NAME) \ +#define CLAUSE_ALIAS(ALIAS_NAME, CLAUSE_NAME, DEPRECATED) \ case OpenACCClauseKind::ALIAS_NAME: \ Visit##CLAUSE_NAME##Clause(*cast<OpenACC##CLAUSE_NAME##Clause>(C)); \ return; diff --git a/clang/include/clang/Basic/OpenACCClauses.def b/clang/include/clang/Basic/OpenACCClauses.def index 53f4cd103d142..85f4859925f0b 100644 --- a/clang/include/clang/Basic/OpenACCClauses.def +++ b/clang/include/clang/Basic/OpenACCClauses.def @@ -15,31 +15,31 @@ // // VISIT_CLAUSE(CLAUSE_NAME) // -// CLAUSE_ALIAS(ALIAS_NAME, CLAUSE_NAME) +// CLAUSE_ALIAS(ALIAS_NAME, CLAUSE_NAME, DEPRECATED) #ifndef CLAUSE_ALIAS -#define CLAUSE_ALIAS(ALIAS_NAME, CLAUSE_NAME) +#define CLAUSE_ALIAS(ALIAS_NAME, CLAUSE_NAME, false) #endif VISIT_CLAUSE(Auto) VISIT_CLAUSE(Async) VISIT_CLAUSE(Attach) VISIT_CLAUSE(Copy) -CLAUSE_ALIAS(PCopy, Copy) -CLAUSE_ALIAS(PresentOrCopy, Copy) +CLAUSE_ALIAS(PCopy, Copy, true) +CLAUSE_ALIAS(PresentOrCopy, Copy, true) VISIT_CLAUSE(CopyIn) -CLAUSE_ALIAS(PCopyIn, CopyIn) -CLAUSE_ALIAS(PresentOrCopyIn, CopyIn) +CLAUSE_ALIAS(PCopyIn, CopyIn, true) +CLAUSE_ALIAS(PresentOrCopyIn, CopyIn, true) VISIT_CLAUSE(CopyOut) -CLAUSE_ALIAS(PCopyOut, CopyOut) -CLAUSE_ALIAS(PresentOrCopyOut, CopyOut) +CLAUSE_ALIAS(PCopyOut, CopyOut, true) +CLAUSE_ALIAS(PresentOrCopyOut, CopyOut, true) VISIT_CLAUSE(Create) -CLAUSE_ALIAS(PCreate, Create) -CLAUSE_ALIAS(PresentOrCreate, Create) +CLAUSE_ALIAS(PCreate, Create, true) +CLAUSE_ALIAS(PresentOrCreate, Create, true) VISIT_CLAUSE(Default) VISIT_CLAUSE(DevicePtr) VISIT_CLAUSE(DeviceType) -CLAUSE_ALIAS(DType, DeviceType) +CLAUSE_ALIAS(DType, DeviceType, false) VISIT_CLAUSE(FirstPrivate) VISIT_CLAUSE(If) VISIT_CLAUSE(Independent) diff --git a/clang/lib/AST/OpenACCClause.cpp b/clang/lib/AST/OpenACCClause.cpp index 403ce9a221571..95089a9b79e26 100644 --- a/clang/lib/AST/OpenACCClause.cpp +++ b/clang/lib/AST/OpenACCClause.cpp @@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ OpenACCClause::child_range OpenACCClause::children() { #define VISIT_CLAUSE(CLAUSE_NAME) \ case OpenACCClauseKind::CLAUSE_NAME: \ return cast<OpenACC##CLAUSE_NAME##Clause>(this)->children(); -#define CLAUSE_ALIAS(ALIAS_NAME, CLAUSE_NAME) \ +#define CLAUSE_ALIAS(ALIAS_NAME, CLAUSE_NAME, DEPRECATED) \ case OpenACCClauseKind::ALIAS_NAME: \ return cast<OpenACC##CLAUSE_NAME##Clause>(this)->children(); diff --git a/clang/lib/Sema/SemaOpenACC.cpp b/clang/lib/Sema/SemaOpenACC.cpp index 1320fd90b440b..97586a037eee4 100644 --- a/clang/lib/Sema/SemaOpenACC.cpp +++ b/clang/lib/Sema/SemaOpenACC.cpp @@ -424,617 +424,736 @@ bool checkValidAfterDeviceType( S.Diag(DeviceTypeClause.getBeginLoc(), diag::note_acc_previous_clause_here); return true; } -} // namespace -SemaOpenACC::SemaOpenACC(Sema &S) : SemaBase(S) {} +class SemaOpenACCClauseVisitor { + SemaOpenACC &SemaRef; + ASTContext &Ctx; + ArrayRef<const OpenACCClause *> ExistingClauses; + bool NotImplemented = false; -SemaOpenACC::AssociatedStmtRAII::AssociatedStmtRAII(SemaOpenACC &S, - OpenACCDirectiveKind DK) - : SemaRef(S), WasInsideComputeConstruct(S.InsideComputeConstruct), - DirKind(DK) { - // Compute constructs end up taking their 'loop'. - if (DirKind == OpenACCDirectiveKind::Parallel || - DirKind == OpenACCDirectiveKind::Serial || - DirKind == OpenACCDirectiveKind::Kernels) { - SemaRef.InsideComputeConstruct = true; - SemaRef.ParentlessLoopConstructs.swap(ParentlessLoopConstructs); + OpenACCClause *isNotImplemented() { + NotImplemented = true; + return nullptr; } -} -SemaOpenACC::AssociatedStmtRAII::~AssociatedStmtRAII() { - SemaRef.InsideComputeConstruct = WasInsideComputeConstruct; - if (DirKind == OpenACCDirectiveKind::Parallel || - DirKind == OpenACCDirectiveKind::Serial || - DirKind == OpenACCDirectiveKind::Kernels) { - assert(SemaRef.ParentlessLoopConstructs.empty() && - "Didn't consume loop construct list?"); - SemaRef.ParentlessLoopConstructs.swap(ParentlessLoopConstructs); - } -} +public: + SemaOpenACCClauseVisitor(SemaOpenACC &S, + ArrayRef<const OpenACCClause *> ExistingClauses) + : SemaRef(S), Ctx(S.getASTContext()), ExistingClauses(ExistingClauses) {} + // Once we've implemented everything, we shouldn't need this infrastructure. + // But in the meantime, we use this to help decide whether the clause was + // handled for this directive. + bool diagNotImplemented() { return NotImplemented; } + + OpenACCClause *Visit(SemaOpenACC::OpenACCParsedClause &Clause) { + switch (Clause.getClauseKind()) { + case OpenACCClauseKind::Gang: + case OpenACCClauseKind::Worker: + case OpenACCClauseKind::Vector: { + // TODO OpenACC: These are only implemented enough for the 'seq' diagnostic, + // otherwise treats itself as unimplemented. When we implement these, we + // can remove them from here. -OpenACCClause * -SemaOpenACC::ActOnClause(ArrayRef<const OpenACCClause *> ExistingClauses, - OpenACCParsedClause &Clause) { - if (Clause.getClauseKind() == OpenACCClauseKind::Invalid) - return nullptr; + // OpenACC 3.3 2.9: + // A 'gang', 'worker', or 'vector' clause may not appear if a 'seq' clause + // appears. + const auto *Itr = + llvm::find_if(ExistingClauses, llvm::IsaPred<OpenACCSeqClause>); - // Diagnose that we don't support this clause on this directive. - if (!doesClauseApplyToDirective(Clause.getDirectiveKind(), - Clause.getClauseKind())) { - Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::err_acc_clause_appertainment) - << Clause.getDirectiveKind() << Clause.getClauseKind(); - return nullptr; + if (Itr != ExistingClauses.end()) { + SemaRef.Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::err_acc_clause_cannot_combine) + << Clause.getClauseKind() << (*Itr)->getClauseKind(); + SemaRef.Diag((*Itr)->getBeginLoc(), diag::note_acc_previous_clause_here); + } + return isNotImplemented(); } - if (const auto *DevTypeClause = - llvm::find_if(ExistingClauses, - [&](const OpenACCClause *C) { - return isa<OpenACCDeviceTypeClause>(C); - }); - DevTypeClause != ExistingClauses.end()) { - if (checkValidAfterDeviceType( - *this, *cast<OpenACCDeviceTypeClause>(*DevTypeClause), Clause)) - return nullptr; +#define VISIT_CLAUSE(CLAUSE_NAME) \ + case OpenACCClauseKind::CLAUSE_NAME: \ + return Visit##CLAUSE_NAME##Clause(Clause); +#define CLAUSE_ALIAS(ALIAS, CLAUSE_NAME, DEPRECATED) \ + case OpenACCClauseKind::ALIAS: \ + if (DEPRECATED) \ + SemaRef.Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::warn_acc_deprecated_alias_name) \ + << Clause.getClauseKind() << OpenACCClauseKind::CLAUSE_NAME; \ + return Visit##CLAUSE_NAME##Clause(Clause); +#include "clang/Basic/OpenACCClauses.def" + default: + return isNotImplemented(); + } + llvm_unreachable("Invalid clause kind"); } - switch (Clause.getClauseKind()) { - case OpenACCClauseKind::Default: { - // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and - // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with - // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. - if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) - break; +#define VISIT_CLAUSE(CLAUSE_NAME) \ + OpenACCClause *Visit##CLAUSE_NAME##Clause( \ + SemaOpenACC::OpenACCParsedClause &Clause); +#include "clang/Basic/OpenACCClauses.def" +}; - // Don't add an invalid clause to the AST. - if (Clause.getDefaultClauseKind() == OpenACCDefaultClauseKind::Invalid) - return nullptr; - - // OpenACC 3.3, Section 2.5.4: - // At most one 'default' clause may appear, and it must have a value of - // either 'none' or 'present'. - // Second half of the sentence is diagnosed during parsing. - if (checkAlreadyHasClauseOfKind(*this, ExistingClauses, Clause)) - return nullptr; - - return OpenACCDefaultClause::Create( - getASTContext(), Clause.getDefaultClauseKind(), Clause.getBeginLoc(), - Clause.getLParenLoc(), Clause.getEndLoc()); - } +OpenACCClause *SemaOpenACCClauseVisitor::VisitDefaultClause( + SemaOpenACC::OpenACCParsedClause &Clause) { + // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and + // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with + // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. + if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) + return isNotImplemented(); + + // Don't add an invalid clause to the AST. + if (Clause.getDefaultClauseKind() == OpenACCDefaultClauseKind::Invalid) + return nullptr; - case OpenACCClauseKind::If: { - // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and - // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with - // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. - if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) - break; + // OpenACC 3.3, Section 2.5.4: + // At most one 'default' clause may appear, and it must have a value of + // either 'none' or 'present'. + // Second half of the sentence is diagnosed during parsing. + if (checkAlreadyHasClauseOfKind(SemaRef, ExistingClauses, Clause)) + return nullptr; - // There is no prose in the standard that says duplicates aren't allowed, - // but this diagnostic is present in other compilers, as well as makes - // sense. - if (checkAlreadyHasClauseOfKind(*this, ExistingClauses, Clause)) - return nullptr; + return OpenACCDefaultClause::Create( + Ctx, Clause.getDefaultClauseKind(), Clause.getBeginLoc(), + Clause.getLParenLoc(), Clause.getEndLoc()); +} - // The parser has ensured that we have a proper condition expr, so there - // isn't really much to do here. +OpenACCClause *SemaOpenACCClauseVisitor::VisitIfClause( + SemaOpenACC::OpenACCParsedClause &Clause) { + // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and + // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with + // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. + if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) + return isNotImplemented(); + + // There is no prose in the standard that says duplicates aren't allowed, + // but this diagnostic is present in other compilers, as well as makes + // sense. + if (checkAlreadyHasClauseOfKind(SemaRef, ExistingClauses, Clause)) + return nullptr; - // If the 'if' clause is true, it makes the 'self' clause have no effect, - // diagnose that here. - // TODO OpenACC: When we add these two to other constructs, we might not - // want to warn on this (for example, 'update'). - const auto *Itr = - llvm::find_if(ExistingClauses, llvm::IsaPred<OpenACCSelfClause>); - if (Itr != ExistingClauses.end()) { - Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::warn_acc_if_self_conflict); - Diag((*Itr)->getBeginLoc(), diag::note_acc_previous_clause_here); - } + // The parser has ensured that we have a proper condition expr, so there + // isn't really much to do here. - return OpenACCIfClause::Create( - getASTContext(), Clause.getBeginLoc(), Clause.getLParenLoc(), - Clause.getConditionExpr(), Clause.getEndLoc()); + // If the 'if' clause is true, it makes the 'self' clause have no effect, + // diagnose that here. + // TODO OpenACC: When we add these two to other constructs, we might not + // want to warn on this (for example, 'update'). + const auto *Itr = + llvm::find_if(ExistingClauses, llvm::IsaPred<OpenACCSelfClause>); + if (Itr != ExistingClauses.end()) { + SemaRef.Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::warn_acc_if_self_conflict); + SemaRef.Diag((*Itr)->getBeginLoc(), diag::note_acc_previous_clause_here); } - case OpenACCClauseKind::Self: { - // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and - // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with - // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. - if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) - break; - - // TODO OpenACC: When we implement this for 'update', this takes a - // 'var-list' instead of a condition expression, so semantics/handling has - // to happen diff erently here. - - // There is no prose in the standard that says duplicates aren't allowed, - // but this diagnostic is present in other compilers, as well as makes - // sense. - if (checkAlreadyHasClauseOfKind(*this, ExistingClauses, Clause)) - return nullptr; + return OpenACCIfClause::Create(Ctx, Clause.getBeginLoc(), + Clause.getLParenLoc(), + Clause.getConditionExpr(), Clause.getEndLoc()); +} - // If the 'if' clause is true, it makes the 'self' clause have no effect, - // diagnose that here. - // TODO OpenACC: When we add these two to other constructs, we might not - // want to warn on this (for example, 'update'). - const auto *Itr = - llvm::find_if(ExistingClauses, llvm::IsaPred<OpenACCIfClause>); - if (Itr != ExistingClauses.end()) { - Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::warn_acc_if_self_conflict); - Diag((*Itr)->getBeginLoc(), diag::note_acc_previous_clause_here); - } +OpenACCClause *SemaOpenACCClauseVisitor::VisitSelfClause( + SemaOpenACC::OpenACCParsedClause &Clause) { + // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and + // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with + // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. + if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) + return isNotImplemented(); + + // TODO OpenACC: When we implement this for 'update', this takes a + // 'var-list' instead of a condition expression, so semantics/handling has + // to happen diff erently here. + + // There is no prose in the standard that says duplicates aren't allowed, + // but this diagnostic is present in other compilers, as well as makes + // sense. + if (checkAlreadyHasClauseOfKind(SemaRef, ExistingClauses, Clause)) + return nullptr; - return OpenACCSelfClause::Create( - getASTContext(), Clause.getBeginLoc(), Clause.getLParenLoc(), - Clause.getConditionExpr(), Clause.getEndLoc()); + // If the 'if' clause is true, it makes the 'self' clause have no effect, + // diagnose that here. + // TODO OpenACC: When we add these two to other constructs, we might not + // want to warn on this (for example, 'update'). + const auto *Itr = + llvm::find_if(ExistingClauses, llvm::IsaPred<OpenACCIfClause>); + if (Itr != ExistingClauses.end()) { + SemaRef.Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::warn_acc_if_self_conflict); + SemaRef.Diag((*Itr)->getBeginLoc(), diag::note_acc_previous_clause_here); } - case OpenACCClauseKind::NumGangs: { - // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and - // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with - // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. - if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) - break; + return OpenACCSelfClause::Create( + Ctx, Clause.getBeginLoc(), Clause.getLParenLoc(), + Clause.getConditionExpr(), Clause.getEndLoc()); +} - // There is no prose in the standard that says duplicates aren't allowed, - // but this diagnostic is present in other compilers, as well as makes - // sense. - if (checkAlreadyHasClauseOfKind(*this, ExistingClauses, Clause)) - return nullptr; +OpenACCClause *SemaOpenACCClauseVisitor::VisitNumGangsClause( + SemaOpenACC::OpenACCParsedClause &Clause) { + // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and + // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with + // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. + if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) + return isNotImplemented(); + + // There is no prose in the standard that says duplicates aren't allowed, + // but this diagnostic is present in other compilers, as well as makes + // sense. + if (checkAlreadyHasClauseOfKind(SemaRef, ExistingClauses, Clause)) + return nullptr; - if (Clause.getIntExprs().empty()) - Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::err_acc_num_gangs_num_args) - << /*NoArgs=*/0; - - unsigned MaxArgs = - (Clause.getDirectiveKind() == OpenACCDirectiveKind::Parallel || - Clause.getDirectiveKind() == OpenACCDirectiveKind::ParallelLoop) - ? 3 - : 1; - if (Clause.getIntExprs().size() > MaxArgs) - Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::err_acc_num_gangs_num_args) - << /*NoArgs=*/1 << Clause.getDirectiveKind() << MaxArgs + // num_gangs requires at least 1 int expr in all forms. Diagnose here, but + // allow us to continue, an empty clause might be useful for future + // diagnostics. + if (Clause.getIntExprs().empty()) + SemaRef.Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::err_acc_num_gangs_num_args) + << /*NoArgs=*/0; + + unsigned MaxArgs = + (Clause.getDirectiveKind() == OpenACCDirectiveKind::Parallel || + Clause.getDirectiveKind() == OpenACCDirectiveKind::ParallelLoop) + ? 3 + : 1; + // The max number of args diff ers between parallel and other constructs. + // Again, allow us to continue for the purposes of future diagnostics. + if (Clause.getIntExprs().size() > MaxArgs) + SemaRef.Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::err_acc_num_gangs_num_args) + << /*NoArgs=*/1 << Clause.getDirectiveKind() << MaxArgs + << Clause.getIntExprs().size(); + + // OpenACC 3.3 Section 2.5.4: + // A reduction clause may not appear on a parallel construct with a + // num_gangs clause that has more than one argument. + if (Clause.getDirectiveKind() == OpenACCDirectiveKind::Parallel && + Clause.getIntExprs().size() > 1) { + auto *Parallel = + llvm::find_if(ExistingClauses, llvm::IsaPred<OpenACCReductionClause>); + + if (Parallel != ExistingClauses.end()) { + SemaRef.Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), + diag::err_acc_reduction_num_gangs_conflict) << Clause.getIntExprs().size(); - - // OpenACC 3.3 Section 2.5.4: - // A reduction clause may not appear on a parallel construct with a - // num_gangs clause that has more than one argument. - if (Clause.getDirectiveKind() == OpenACCDirectiveKind::Parallel && - Clause.getIntExprs().size() > 1) { - auto *Parallel = - llvm::find_if(ExistingClauses, llvm::IsaPred<OpenACCReductionClause>); - - if (Parallel != ExistingClauses.end()) { - Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::err_acc_reduction_num_gangs_conflict) - << Clause.getIntExprs().size(); - Diag((*Parallel)->getBeginLoc(), diag::note_acc_previous_clause_here); - return nullptr; - } + SemaRef.Diag((*Parallel)->getBeginLoc(), + diag::note_acc_previous_clause_here); + return nullptr; } - - // Create the AST node for the clause even if the number of expressions is - // incorrect. - return OpenACCNumGangsClause::Create( - getASTContext(), Clause.getBeginLoc(), Clause.getLParenLoc(), - Clause.getIntExprs(), Clause.getEndLoc()); - break; } - case OpenACCClauseKind::NumWorkers: { - // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and - // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with - // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. - if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) - break; + return OpenACCNumGangsClause::Create( + Ctx, Clause.getBeginLoc(), Clause.getLParenLoc(), Clause.getIntExprs(), + Clause.getEndLoc()); +} - // There is no prose in the standard that says duplicates aren't allowed, - // but this diagnostic is present in other compilers, as well as makes - // sense. - if (checkAlreadyHasClauseOfKind(*this, ExistingClauses, Clause)) - return nullptr; +OpenACCClause *SemaOpenACCClauseVisitor::VisitNumWorkersClause( + SemaOpenACC::OpenACCParsedClause &Clause) { + // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and + // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with + // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. + if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) + return isNotImplemented(); + + // There is no prose in the standard that says duplicates aren't allowed, + // but this diagnostic is present in other compilers, as well as makes + // sense. + if (checkAlreadyHasClauseOfKind(SemaRef, ExistingClauses, Clause)) + return nullptr; - assert(Clause.getIntExprs().size() == 1 && - "Invalid number of expressions for NumWorkers"); - return OpenACCNumWorkersClause::Create( - getASTContext(), Clause.getBeginLoc(), Clause.getLParenLoc(), - Clause.getIntExprs()[0], Clause.getEndLoc()); - } - case OpenACCClauseKind::VectorLength: { - // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and - // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with - // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. - if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) - break; + assert(Clause.getIntExprs().size() == 1 && + "Invalid number of expressions for NumWorkers"); + return OpenACCNumWorkersClause::Create( + Ctx, Clause.getBeginLoc(), Clause.getLParenLoc(), Clause.getIntExprs()[0], + Clause.getEndLoc()); +} - // There is no prose in the standard that says duplicates aren't allowed, - // but this diagnostic is present in other compilers, as well as makes - // sense. - if (checkAlreadyHasClauseOfKind(*this, ExistingClauses, Clause)) - return nullptr; +OpenACCClause *SemaOpenACCClauseVisitor::VisitVectorLengthClause( + SemaOpenACC::OpenACCParsedClause &Clause) { + // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and + // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with + // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. + if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) + return isNotImplemented(); + + // There is no prose in the standard that says duplicates aren't allowed, + // but this diagnostic is present in other compilers, as well as makes + // sense. + if (checkAlreadyHasClauseOfKind(SemaRef, ExistingClauses, Clause)) + return nullptr; - assert(Clause.getIntExprs().size() == 1 && - "Invalid number of expressions for VectorLength"); - return OpenACCVectorLengthClause::Create( - getASTContext(), Clause.getBeginLoc(), Clause.getLParenLoc(), - Clause.getIntExprs()[0], Clause.getEndLoc()); - } - case OpenACCClauseKind::Async: { - // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and - // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with - // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. - if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) - break; + assert(Clause.getIntExprs().size() == 1 && + "Invalid number of expressions for NumWorkers"); + return OpenACCVectorLengthClause::Create( + Ctx, Clause.getBeginLoc(), Clause.getLParenLoc(), Clause.getIntExprs()[0], + Clause.getEndLoc()); +} - // There is no prose in the standard that says duplicates aren't allowed, - // but this diagnostic is present in other compilers, as well as makes - // sense. - if (checkAlreadyHasClauseOfKind(*this, ExistingClauses, Clause)) - return nullptr; +OpenACCClause *SemaOpenACCClauseVisitor::VisitAsyncClause( + SemaOpenACC::OpenACCParsedClause &Clause) { + // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and + // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with + // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. + if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) + return isNotImplemented(); + + // There is no prose in the standard that says duplicates aren't allowed, + // but this diagnostic is present in other compilers, as well as makes + // sense. + if (checkAlreadyHasClauseOfKind(SemaRef, ExistingClauses, Clause)) + return nullptr; - assert(Clause.getNumIntExprs() < 2 && - "Invalid number of expressions for Async"); + assert(Clause.getNumIntExprs() < 2 && + "Invalid number of expressions for Async"); + return OpenACCAsyncClause::Create( + Ctx, Clause.getBeginLoc(), Clause.getLParenLoc(), + Clause.getNumIntExprs() != 0 ? Clause.getIntExprs()[0] : nullptr, + Clause.getEndLoc()); +} - return OpenACCAsyncClause::Create( - getASTContext(), Clause.getBeginLoc(), Clause.getLParenLoc(), - Clause.getNumIntExprs() != 0 ? Clause.getIntExprs()[0] : nullptr, - Clause.getEndLoc()); - } - case OpenACCClauseKind::Private: { - // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' and 'loop' - // constructs, and 'compute'/'loop' constructs are the only construct that - // can do anything with this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this - // case. - if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind()) && - Clause.getDirectiveKind() != OpenACCDirectiveKind::Loop) - break; +OpenACCClause *SemaOpenACCClauseVisitor::VisitPrivateClause( + SemaOpenACC::OpenACCParsedClause &Clause) { + // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' and 'loop' + // constructs, and 'compute'/'loop' constructs are the only construct that + // can do anything with this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this + // case. + if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind()) && + Clause.getDirectiveKind() != OpenACCDirectiveKind::Loop) + return isNotImplemented(); + + // ActOnVar ensured that everything is a valid variable reference, so there + // really isn't anything to do here. GCC does some duplicate-finding, though + // it isn't apparent in the standard where this is justified. + + return OpenACCPrivateClause::Create(Ctx, Clause.getBeginLoc(), + Clause.getLParenLoc(), + Clause.getVarList(), Clause.getEndLoc()); +} - // ActOnVar ensured that everything is a valid variable reference, so there - // really isn't anything to do here. GCC does some duplicate-finding, though - // it isn't apparent in the standard where this is justified. +OpenACCClause *SemaOpenACCClauseVisitor::VisitFirstPrivateClause( + SemaOpenACC::OpenACCParsedClause &Clause) { + // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and + // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with + // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. + if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) + return isNotImplemented(); + + // ActOnVar ensured that everything is a valid variable reference, so there + // really isn't anything to do here. GCC does some duplicate-finding, though + // it isn't apparent in the standard where this is justified. + + return OpenACCFirstPrivateClause::Create( + Ctx, Clause.getBeginLoc(), Clause.getLParenLoc(), Clause.getVarList(), + Clause.getEndLoc()); +} - return OpenACCPrivateClause::Create( - getASTContext(), Clause.getBeginLoc(), Clause.getLParenLoc(), - Clause.getVarList(), Clause.getEndLoc()); - } - case OpenACCClauseKind::FirstPrivate: { - // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and - // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with - // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. - if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) - break; +OpenACCClause *SemaOpenACCClauseVisitor::VisitNoCreateClause( + SemaOpenACC::OpenACCParsedClause &Clause) { + // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and + // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with + // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. + if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) + return isNotImplemented(); + // ActOnVar ensured that everything is a valid variable reference, so there + // really isn't anything to do here. GCC does some duplicate-finding, though + // it isn't apparent in the standard where this is justified. + + return OpenACCNoCreateClause::Create(Ctx, Clause.getBeginLoc(), + Clause.getLParenLoc(), + Clause.getVarList(), Clause.getEndLoc()); +} - // ActOnVar ensured that everything is a valid variable reference, so there - // really isn't anything to do here. GCC does some duplicate-finding, though - // it isn't apparent in the standard where this is justified. +OpenACCClause *SemaOpenACCClauseVisitor::VisitPresentClause( + SemaOpenACC::OpenACCParsedClause &Clause) { + // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and + // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with + // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. + if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) + return isNotImplemented(); + // ActOnVar ensured that everything is a valid variable reference, so there + // really isn't anything to do here. GCC does some duplicate-finding, though + // it isn't apparent in the standard where this is justified. + + return OpenACCPresentClause::Create(Ctx, Clause.getBeginLoc(), + Clause.getLParenLoc(), + Clause.getVarList(), Clause.getEndLoc()); +} - return OpenACCFirstPrivateClause::Create( - getASTContext(), Clause.getBeginLoc(), Clause.getLParenLoc(), - Clause.getVarList(), Clause.getEndLoc()); - } - case OpenACCClauseKind::NoCreate: { - // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and - // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with - // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. - if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) - break; +OpenACCClause *SemaOpenACCClauseVisitor::VisitCopyClause( + SemaOpenACC::OpenACCParsedClause &Clause) { + // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and + // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with + // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. + if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) + return isNotImplemented(); + // ActOnVar ensured that everything is a valid variable reference, so there + // really isn't anything to do here. GCC does some duplicate-finding, though + // it isn't apparent in the standard where this is justified. + + return OpenACCCopyClause::Create( + Ctx, Clause.getClauseKind(), Clause.getBeginLoc(), Clause.getLParenLoc(), + Clause.getVarList(), Clause.getEndLoc()); +} - // ActOnVar ensured that everything is a valid variable reference, so there - // really isn't anything to do here. GCC does some duplicate-finding, though - // it isn't apparent in the standard where this is justified. +OpenACCClause *SemaOpenACCClauseVisitor::VisitCopyInClause( + SemaOpenACC::OpenACCParsedClause &Clause) { + // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and + // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with + // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. + if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) + return isNotImplemented(); + // ActOnVar ensured that everything is a valid variable reference, so there + // really isn't anything to do here. GCC does some duplicate-finding, though + // it isn't apparent in the standard where this is justified. + + return OpenACCCopyInClause::Create( + Ctx, Clause.getClauseKind(), Clause.getBeginLoc(), Clause.getLParenLoc(), + Clause.isReadOnly(), Clause.getVarList(), Clause.getEndLoc()); +} - return OpenACCNoCreateClause::Create( - getASTContext(), Clause.getBeginLoc(), Clause.getLParenLoc(), - Clause.getVarList(), Clause.getEndLoc()); - } - case OpenACCClauseKind::Present: { - // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and - // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with - // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. - if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) - break; +OpenACCClause *SemaOpenACCClauseVisitor::VisitCopyOutClause( + SemaOpenACC::OpenACCParsedClause &Clause) { + // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and + // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with + // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. + if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) + return isNotImplemented(); + // ActOnVar ensured that everything is a valid variable reference, so there + // really isn't anything to do here. GCC does some duplicate-finding, though + // it isn't apparent in the standard where this is justified. + + return OpenACCCopyOutClause::Create( + Ctx, Clause.getClauseKind(), Clause.getBeginLoc(), Clause.getLParenLoc(), + Clause.isZero(), Clause.getVarList(), Clause.getEndLoc()); +} - // ActOnVar ensured that everything is a valid variable reference, so there - // really isn't anything to do here. GCC does some duplicate-finding, though - // it isn't apparent in the standard where this is justified. +OpenACCClause *SemaOpenACCClauseVisitor::VisitCreateClause( + SemaOpenACC::OpenACCParsedClause &Clause) { + // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and + // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with + // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. + if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) + return isNotImplemented(); + // ActOnVar ensured that everything is a valid variable reference, so there + // really isn't anything to do here. GCC does some duplicate-finding, though + // it isn't apparent in the standard where this is justified. + + return OpenACCCreateClause::Create( + Ctx, Clause.getClauseKind(), Clause.getBeginLoc(), Clause.getLParenLoc(), + Clause.isZero(), Clause.getVarList(), Clause.getEndLoc()); +} - return OpenACCPresentClause::Create( - getASTContext(), Clause.getBeginLoc(), Clause.getLParenLoc(), - Clause.getVarList(), Clause.getEndLoc()); - } - case OpenACCClauseKind::PresentOrCopy: - case OpenACCClauseKind::PCopy: - Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::warn_acc_deprecated_alias_name) - << Clause.getClauseKind() << OpenACCClauseKind::Copy; - LLVM_FALLTHROUGH; - case OpenACCClauseKind::Copy: { - // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and - // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with - // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. - if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) - break; +OpenACCClause *SemaOpenACCClauseVisitor::VisitAttachClause( + SemaOpenACC::OpenACCParsedClause &Clause) { + // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and + // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with + // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. + if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) + return isNotImplemented(); + + // ActOnVar ensured that everything is a valid variable reference, but we + // still have to make sure it is a pointer type. + llvm::SmallVector<Expr *> VarList{Clause.getVarList().begin(), + Clause.getVarList().end()}; + VarList.erase(std::remove_if(VarList.begin(), VarList.end(), + [&](Expr *E) { + return SemaRef.CheckVarIsPointerType( + OpenACCClauseKind::Attach, E); + }), + VarList.end()); + Clause.setVarListDetails(VarList, + /*IsReadOnly=*/false, /*IsZero=*/false); + return OpenACCAttachClause::Create(Ctx, Clause.getBeginLoc(), + Clause.getLParenLoc(), Clause.getVarList(), + Clause.getEndLoc()); +} - // ActOnVar ensured that everything is a valid variable reference, so there - // really isn't anything to do here. GCC does some duplicate-finding, though - // it isn't apparent in the standard where this is justified. +OpenACCClause *SemaOpenACCClauseVisitor::VisitDevicePtrClause( + SemaOpenACC::OpenACCParsedClause &Clause) { + // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and + // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with + // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. + if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) + return isNotImplemented(); + + // ActOnVar ensured that everything is a valid variable reference, but we + // still have to make sure it is a pointer type. + llvm::SmallVector<Expr *> VarList{Clause.getVarList().begin(), + Clause.getVarList().end()}; + VarList.erase(std::remove_if(VarList.begin(), VarList.end(), + [&](Expr *E) { + return SemaRef.CheckVarIsPointerType( + OpenACCClauseKind::DevicePtr, E); + }), + VarList.end()); + Clause.setVarListDetails(VarList, + /*IsReadOnly=*/false, /*IsZero=*/false); + + return OpenACCDevicePtrClause::Create( + Ctx, Clause.getBeginLoc(), Clause.getLParenLoc(), Clause.getVarList(), + Clause.getEndLoc()); +} - return OpenACCCopyClause::Create( - getASTContext(), Clause.getClauseKind(), Clause.getBeginLoc(), - Clause.getLParenLoc(), Clause.getVarList(), Clause.getEndLoc()); - } - case OpenACCClauseKind::PresentOrCopyIn: - case OpenACCClauseKind::PCopyIn: - Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::warn_acc_deprecated_alias_name) - << Clause.getClauseKind() << OpenACCClauseKind::CopyIn; - LLVM_FALLTHROUGH; - case OpenACCClauseKind::CopyIn: { - // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and - // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with - // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. - if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) - break; +OpenACCClause *SemaOpenACCClauseVisitor::VisitWaitClause( + SemaOpenACC::OpenACCParsedClause &Clause) { + // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and + // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with + // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. + if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) + return isNotImplemented(); + + return OpenACCWaitClause::Create( + Ctx, Clause.getBeginLoc(), Clause.getLParenLoc(), Clause.getDevNumExpr(), + Clause.getQueuesLoc(), Clause.getQueueIdExprs(), Clause.getEndLoc()); +} - // ActOnVar ensured that everything is a valid variable reference, so there - // really isn't anything to do here. GCC does some duplicate-finding, though - // it isn't apparent in the standard where this is justified. +OpenACCClause *SemaOpenACCClauseVisitor::VisitDeviceTypeClause( + SemaOpenACC::OpenACCParsedClause &Clause) { + // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' and 'loop' + // constructs, and 'compute'/'loop' constructs are the only construct that + // can do anything with this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this + // case. + if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind()) && + Clause.getDirectiveKind() != OpenACCDirectiveKind::Loop) + return isNotImplemented(); + + // TODO OpenACC: Once we get enough of the CodeGen implemented that we have + // a source for the list of valid architectures, we need to warn on unknown + // identifiers here. + + return OpenACCDeviceTypeClause::Create( + Ctx, Clause.getClauseKind(), Clause.getBeginLoc(), Clause.getLParenLoc(), + Clause.getDeviceTypeArchitectures(), Clause.getEndLoc()); +} - return OpenACCCopyInClause::Create( - getASTContext(), Clause.getClauseKind(), Clause.getBeginLoc(), - Clause.getLParenLoc(), Clause.isReadOnly(), Clause.getVarList(), - Clause.getEndLoc()); +OpenACCClause *SemaOpenACCClauseVisitor::VisitAutoClause( + SemaOpenACC::OpenACCParsedClause &Clause) { + // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'loop' constructs, and it is + // the only construct that can do anything with this, so skip/treat as + // unimplemented for the combined constructs. + if (Clause.getDirectiveKind() != OpenACCDirectiveKind::Loop) + return isNotImplemented(); + + // OpenACC 3.3 2.9: + // Only one of the seq, independent, and auto clauses may appear. + const auto *Itr = + llvm::find_if(ExistingClauses, + llvm::IsaPred<OpenACCIndependentClause, OpenACCSeqClause>); + if (Itr != ExistingClauses.end()) { + SemaRef.Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::err_acc_loop_spec_conflict) + << Clause.getClauseKind() << Clause.getDirectiveKind(); + SemaRef.Diag((*Itr)->getBeginLoc(), diag::note_acc_previous_clause_here); + return nullptr; } - case OpenACCClauseKind::PresentOrCopyOut: - case OpenACCClauseKind::PCopyOut: - Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::warn_acc_deprecated_alias_name) - << Clause.getClauseKind() << OpenACCClauseKind::CopyOut; - LLVM_FALLTHROUGH; - case OpenACCClauseKind::CopyOut: { - // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and - // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with - // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. - if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) - break; - // ActOnVar ensured that everything is a valid variable reference, so there - // really isn't anything to do here. GCC does some duplicate-finding, though - // it isn't apparent in the standard where this is justified. + return OpenACCAutoClause::Create(Ctx, Clause.getBeginLoc(), + Clause.getEndLoc()); +} - return OpenACCCopyOutClause::Create( - getASTContext(), Clause.getClauseKind(), Clause.getBeginLoc(), - Clause.getLParenLoc(), Clause.isZero(), Clause.getVarList(), - Clause.getEndLoc()); +OpenACCClause *SemaOpenACCClauseVisitor::VisitIndependentClause( + SemaOpenACC::OpenACCParsedClause &Clause) { + // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'loop' constructs, and it is + // the only construct that can do anything with this, so skip/treat as + // unimplemented for the combined constructs. + if (Clause.getDirectiveKind() != OpenACCDirectiveKind::Loop) + return isNotImplemented(); + + // OpenACC 3.3 2.9: + // Only one of the seq, independent, and auto clauses may appear. + const auto *Itr = llvm::find_if( + ExistingClauses, llvm::IsaPred<OpenACCAutoClause, OpenACCSeqClause>); + if (Itr != ExistingClauses.end()) { + SemaRef.Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::err_acc_loop_spec_conflict) + << Clause.getClauseKind() << Clause.getDirectiveKind(); + SemaRef.Diag((*Itr)->getBeginLoc(), diag::note_acc_previous_clause_here); + return nullptr; } - case OpenACCClauseKind::PresentOrCreate: - case OpenACCClauseKind::PCreate: - Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::warn_acc_deprecated_alias_name) - << Clause.getClauseKind() << OpenACCClauseKind::Create; - LLVM_FALLTHROUGH; - case OpenACCClauseKind::Create: { - // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and - // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with - // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. - if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) - break; - - // ActOnVar ensured that everything is a valid variable reference, so there - // really isn't anything to do here. GCC does some duplicate-finding, though - // it isn't apparent in the standard where this is justified. - return OpenACCCreateClause::Create(getASTContext(), Clause.getClauseKind(), - Clause.getBeginLoc(), - Clause.getLParenLoc(), Clause.isZero(), - Clause.getVarList(), Clause.getEndLoc()); - } - case OpenACCClauseKind::Attach: { - // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and - // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with - // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. - if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) - break; + return OpenACCIndependentClause::Create(Ctx, Clause.getBeginLoc(), + Clause.getEndLoc()); +} - // ActOnVar ensured that everything is a valid variable reference, but we - // still have to make sure it is a pointer type. - llvm::SmallVector<Expr *> VarList{Clause.getVarList().begin(), - Clause.getVarList().end()}; - VarList.erase(std::remove_if(VarList.begin(), VarList.end(), [&](Expr *E) { - return CheckVarIsPointerType(OpenACCClauseKind::Attach, E); - }), VarList.end()); - Clause.setVarListDetails(VarList, - /*IsReadOnly=*/false, /*IsZero=*/false); - - return OpenACCAttachClause::Create(getASTContext(), Clause.getBeginLoc(), - Clause.getLParenLoc(), - Clause.getVarList(), Clause.getEndLoc()); +OpenACCClause *SemaOpenACCClauseVisitor::VisitSeqClause( + SemaOpenACC::OpenACCParsedClause &Clause) { + // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'loop' constructs, and it is + // the only construct that can do anything with this, so skip/treat as + // unimplemented for the combined constructs. + if (Clause.getDirectiveKind() != OpenACCDirectiveKind::Loop) + return isNotImplemented(); + + // OpenACC 3.3 2.9: + // Only one of the seq, independent, and auto clauses may appear. + const auto *Itr = + llvm::find_if(ExistingClauses, + llvm::IsaPred<OpenACCAutoClause, OpenACCIndependentClause>); + if (Itr != ExistingClauses.end()) { + SemaRef.Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::err_acc_loop_spec_conflict) + << Clause.getClauseKind() << Clause.getDirectiveKind(); + SemaRef.Diag((*Itr)->getBeginLoc(), diag::note_acc_previous_clause_here); + return nullptr; } - case OpenACCClauseKind::DevicePtr: { - // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and - // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with - // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. - if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) - break; - // ActOnVar ensured that everything is a valid variable reference, but we - // still have to make sure it is a pointer type. - llvm::SmallVector<Expr *> VarList{Clause.getVarList().begin(), - Clause.getVarList().end()}; - VarList.erase(std::remove_if(VarList.begin(), VarList.end(), [&](Expr *E) { - return CheckVarIsPointerType(OpenACCClauseKind::DevicePtr, E); - }), VarList.end()); - Clause.setVarListDetails(VarList, - /*IsReadOnly=*/false, /*IsZero=*/false); - - return OpenACCDevicePtrClause::Create( - getASTContext(), Clause.getBeginLoc(), Clause.getLParenLoc(), - Clause.getVarList(), Clause.getEndLoc()); - } - case OpenACCClauseKind::Wait: { - // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and - // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with - // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. - if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) - break; + // OpenACC 3.3 2.9: + // A 'gang', 'worker', or 'vector' clause may not appear if a 'seq' clause + // appears. + Itr = llvm::find_if(ExistingClauses, + llvm::IsaPred<OpenACCGangClause, OpenACCWorkerClause, + OpenACCVectorClause>); - return OpenACCWaitClause::Create( - getASTContext(), Clause.getBeginLoc(), Clause.getLParenLoc(), - Clause.getDevNumExpr(), Clause.getQueuesLoc(), Clause.getQueueIdExprs(), - Clause.getEndLoc()); + if (Itr != ExistingClauses.end()) { + SemaRef.Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::err_acc_clause_cannot_combine) + << Clause.getClauseKind() << (*Itr)->getClauseKind(); + SemaRef.Diag((*Itr)->getBeginLoc(), diag::note_acc_previous_clause_here); + return nullptr; } - case OpenACCClauseKind::DType: - case OpenACCClauseKind::DeviceType: { - // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' and 'loop' - // constructs, and 'compute'/'loop' constructs are the only construct that - // can do anything with this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this - // case. - if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind()) && - Clause.getDirectiveKind() != OpenACCDirectiveKind::Loop) - break; - // TODO OpenACC: Once we get enough of the CodeGen implemented that we have - // a source for the list of valid architectures, we need to warn on unknown - // identifiers here. - - return OpenACCDeviceTypeClause::Create( - getASTContext(), Clause.getClauseKind(), Clause.getBeginLoc(), - Clause.getLParenLoc(), Clause.getDeviceTypeArchitectures(), - Clause.getEndLoc()); - } - case OpenACCClauseKind::Auto: { - // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'loop' constructs, and it is - // the only construct that can do anything with this, so skip/treat as - // unimplemented for the combined constructs. - if (Clause.getDirectiveKind() != OpenACCDirectiveKind::Loop) - break; + // TODO OpenACC: 2.9 ~ line 2010 specifies that the associated loop has some + // restrictions when there is a 'seq' clause in place. We probably need to + // implement that. + return OpenACCSeqClause::Create(Ctx, Clause.getBeginLoc(), + Clause.getEndLoc()); +} - // OpenACC 3.3 2.9: - // Only one of the seq, independent, and auto clauses may appear. - const auto *Itr = llvm::find_if( - ExistingClauses, - llvm::IsaPred<OpenACCIndependentClause, OpenACCSeqClause>); - if (Itr != ExistingClauses.end()) { - Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::err_acc_loop_spec_conflict) - << Clause.getClauseKind() << Clause.getDirectiveKind(); - Diag((*Itr)->getBeginLoc(), diag::note_acc_previous_clause_here); +OpenACCClause *SemaOpenACCClauseVisitor::VisitReductionClause( + SemaOpenACC::OpenACCParsedClause &Clause) { + // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and + // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with + // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. + if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) + return isNotImplemented(); + + // OpenACC 3.3 Section 2.5.4: + // A reduction clause may not appear on a parallel construct with a + // num_gangs clause that has more than one argument. + if (Clause.getDirectiveKind() == OpenACCDirectiveKind::Parallel) { + auto NumGangsClauses = llvm::make_filter_range( + ExistingClauses, llvm::IsaPred<OpenACCNumGangsClause>); + + for (auto *NGC : NumGangsClauses) { + unsigned NumExprs = + cast<OpenACCNumGangsClause>(NGC)->getIntExprs().size(); + + if (NumExprs > 1) { + SemaRef.Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), + diag::err_acc_reduction_num_gangs_conflict) + << NumExprs; + SemaRef.Diag(NGC->getBeginLoc(), diag::note_acc_previous_clause_here); + return nullptr; + } } - - return OpenACCAutoClause::Create(getASTContext(), Clause.getBeginLoc(), - Clause.getEndLoc()); } - case OpenACCClauseKind::Independent: { - // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'loop' constructs, and it is - // the only construct that can do anything with this, so skip/treat as - // unimplemented for the combined constructs. - if (Clause.getDirectiveKind() != OpenACCDirectiveKind::Loop) - break; - // OpenACC 3.3 2.9: - // Only one of the seq, independent, and auto clauses may appear. - const auto *Itr = llvm::find_if( - ExistingClauses, llvm::IsaPred<OpenACCAutoClause, OpenACCSeqClause>); - if (Itr != ExistingClauses.end()) { - Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::err_acc_loop_spec_conflict) - << Clause.getClauseKind() << Clause.getDirectiveKind(); - Diag((*Itr)->getBeginLoc(), diag::note_acc_previous_clause_here); - } + SmallVector<Expr *> ValidVars; + + for (Expr *Var : Clause.getVarList()) { + ExprResult Res = SemaRef.CheckReductionVar(Var); - return OpenACCIndependentClause::Create( - getASTContext(), Clause.getBeginLoc(), Clause.getEndLoc()); + if (Res.isUsable()) + ValidVars.push_back(Res.get()); } - case OpenACCClauseKind::Seq: { - // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'loop' constructs, and it is - // the only construct that can do anything with this, so skip/treat as - // unimplemented for the combined constructs. - if (Clause.getDirectiveKind() != OpenACCDirectiveKind::Loop) - break; - // OpenACC 3.3 2.9: - // Only one of the seq, independent, and auto clauses may appear. - const auto *Itr = llvm::find_if( - ExistingClauses, - llvm::IsaPred<OpenACCAutoClause, OpenACCIndependentClause>); - if (Itr != ExistingClauses.end()) { - Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::err_acc_loop_spec_conflict) - << Clause.getClauseKind() << Clause.getDirectiveKind(); - Diag((*Itr)->getBeginLoc(), diag::note_acc_previous_clause_here); - } + return OpenACCReductionClause::Create( + Ctx, Clause.getBeginLoc(), Clause.getLParenLoc(), Clause.getReductionOp(), + ValidVars, Clause.getEndLoc()); +} - // OpenACC 3.3 2.9: - // A 'gang', 'worker', or 'vector' clause may not appear if a 'seq' clause - // appears. - Itr = llvm::find_if(ExistingClauses, - llvm::IsaPred<OpenACCGangClause, OpenACCWorkerClause, - OpenACCVectorClause>); +} // namespace - if (Itr != ExistingClauses.end()) { - Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::err_acc_clause_cannot_combine) - << Clause.getClauseKind() << (*Itr)->getClauseKind(); - Diag((*Itr)->getBeginLoc(), diag::note_acc_previous_clause_here); - } +SemaOpenACC::SemaOpenACC(Sema &S) : SemaBase(S) {} - // TODO OpenACC: 2.9 ~ line 2010 specifies that the associated loop has some - // restrictions when there is a 'seq' clause in place. We probably need to - // implement that. - return OpenACCSeqClause::Create(getASTContext(), Clause.getBeginLoc(), - Clause.getEndLoc()); +SemaOpenACC::AssociatedStmtRAII::AssociatedStmtRAII(SemaOpenACC &S, + OpenACCDirectiveKind DK) + : SemaRef(S), WasInsideComputeConstruct(S.InsideComputeConstruct), + DirKind(DK) { + // Compute constructs end up taking their 'loop'. + if (DirKind == OpenACCDirectiveKind::Parallel || + DirKind == OpenACCDirectiveKind::Serial || + DirKind == OpenACCDirectiveKind::Kernels) { + SemaRef.InsideComputeConstruct = true; + SemaRef.ParentlessLoopConstructs.swap(ParentlessLoopConstructs); } - case OpenACCClauseKind::Gang: - case OpenACCClauseKind::Worker: - case OpenACCClauseKind::Vector: { - // OpenACC 3.3 2.9: - // A 'gang', 'worker', or 'vector' clause may not appear if a 'seq' clause - // appears. - const auto *Itr = - llvm::find_if(ExistingClauses, llvm::IsaPred<OpenACCSeqClause>); +} - if (Itr != ExistingClauses.end()) { - Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::err_acc_clause_cannot_combine) - << Clause.getClauseKind() << (*Itr)->getClauseKind(); - Diag((*Itr)->getBeginLoc(), diag::note_acc_previous_clause_here); - } - // Not yet implemented, so immediately drop to the 'not yet implemented' - // diagnostic. - break; +SemaOpenACC::AssociatedStmtRAII::~AssociatedStmtRAII() { + SemaRef.InsideComputeConstruct = WasInsideComputeConstruct; + if (DirKind == OpenACCDirectiveKind::Parallel || + DirKind == OpenACCDirectiveKind::Serial || + DirKind == OpenACCDirectiveKind::Kernels) { + assert(SemaRef.ParentlessLoopConstructs.empty() && + "Didn't consume loop construct list?"); + SemaRef.ParentlessLoopConstructs.swap(ParentlessLoopConstructs); } - case OpenACCClauseKind::Reduction: { - // Restrictions only properly implemented on 'compute' constructs, and - // 'compute' constructs are the only construct that can do anything with - // this yet, so skip/treat as unimplemented in this case. - if (!isOpenACCComputeDirectiveKind(Clause.getDirectiveKind())) - break; - - // OpenACC 3.3 Section 2.5.4: - // A reduction clause may not appear on a parallel construct with a - // num_gangs clause that has more than one argument. - if (Clause.getDirectiveKind() == OpenACCDirectiveKind::Parallel) { - auto NumGangsClauses = llvm::make_filter_range( - ExistingClauses, llvm::IsaPred<OpenACCNumGangsClause>); - - for (auto *NGC : NumGangsClauses) { - unsigned NumExprs = - cast<OpenACCNumGangsClause>(NGC)->getIntExprs().size(); - - if (NumExprs > 1) { - Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::err_acc_reduction_num_gangs_conflict) - << NumExprs; - Diag(NGC->getBeginLoc(), diag::note_acc_previous_clause_here); - return nullptr; - } - } - } - - SmallVector<Expr *> ValidVars; - - for (Expr *Var : Clause.getVarList()) { - ExprResult Res = CheckReductionVar(Var); +} - if (Res.isUsable()) - ValidVars.push_back(Res.get()); - } +OpenACCClause * +SemaOpenACC::ActOnClause(ArrayRef<const OpenACCClause *> ExistingClauses, + OpenACCParsedClause &Clause) { + if (Clause.getClauseKind() == OpenACCClauseKind::Invalid) + return nullptr; - return OpenACCReductionClause::Create( - getASTContext(), Clause.getBeginLoc(), Clause.getLParenLoc(), - Clause.getReductionOp(), ValidVars, Clause.getEndLoc()); + // Diagnose that we don't support this clause on this directive. + if (!doesClauseApplyToDirective(Clause.getDirectiveKind(), + Clause.getClauseKind())) { + Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::err_acc_clause_appertainment) + << Clause.getDirectiveKind() << Clause.getClauseKind(); + return nullptr; } - default: - break; + + if (const auto *DevTypeClause = + llvm::find_if(ExistingClauses, + [&](const OpenACCClause *C) { + return isa<OpenACCDeviceTypeClause>(C); + }); + DevTypeClause != ExistingClauses.end()) { + if (checkValidAfterDeviceType( + *this, *cast<OpenACCDeviceTypeClause>(*DevTypeClause), Clause)) + return nullptr; } - Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::warn_acc_clause_unimplemented) - << Clause.getClauseKind(); - return nullptr; + SemaOpenACCClauseVisitor Visitor{*this, ExistingClauses}; + OpenACCClause *Result = Visitor.Visit(Clause); + assert((!Result || Result->getClauseKind() == Clause.getClauseKind()) && + "Created wrong clause?"); + + if (Visitor.diagNotImplemented()) + Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::warn_acc_clause_unimplemented) + << Clause.getClauseKind(); + + return Result; + + // switch (Clause.getClauseKind()) { + // case OpenACCClauseKind::PresentOrCopy: + // case OpenACCClauseKind::PCopy: + // Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::warn_acc_deprecated_alias_name) + // << Clause.getClauseKind() << OpenACCClauseKind::Copy; + // LLVM_FALLTHROUGH; + // case OpenACCClauseKind::PresentOrCreate: + // case OpenACCClauseKind::PCreate: + // Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::warn_acc_deprecated_alias_name) + // << Clause.getClauseKind() << OpenACCClauseKind::Create; + // LLVM_FALLTHROUGH; + // + // + // + // + // case OpenACCClauseKind::DType: + // + // + // + // + // + // + // + // + // case OpenACCClauseKind::Gang: + // case OpenACCClauseKind::Worker: + // case OpenACCClauseKind::Vector: { + // // OpenACC 3.3 2.9: + // // A 'gang', 'worker', or 'vector' clause may not appear if a 'seq' + // clause + // // appears. + // const auto *Itr = + // llvm::find_if(ExistingClauses, llvm::IsaPred<OpenACCSeqClause>); + // + // if (Itr != ExistingClauses.end()) { + // Diag(Clause.getBeginLoc(), diag::err_acc_clause_cannot_combine) + // << Clause.getClauseKind() << (*Itr)->getClauseKind(); + // Diag((*Itr)->getBeginLoc(), diag::note_acc_previous_clause_here); + // } + // // Not yet implemented, so immediately drop to the 'not yet implemented' + // // diagnostic. + // break; + // } + // */ + } /// OpenACC 3.3 section 2.5.15: _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
