================
@@ -7831,10 +7831,14 @@ void
CodeGenFunction::EmitOMPTaskLoopBasedDirective(const OMPLoopDirective &S) {
// grainsize clause
Data.Schedule.setInt(/*IntVal=*/false);
Data.Schedule.setPointer(EmitScalarExpr(Clause->getGrainsize()));
+ Data.HasModifier =
+ (Clause->getModifier() == OMPC_GRAINSIZE_strict) ? true : false;
} else if (const auto *Clause = S.getSingleClause<OMPNumTasksClause>()) {
// num_tasks clause
Data.Schedule.setInt(/*IntVal=*/true);
Data.Schedule.setPointer(EmitScalarExpr(Clause->getNumTasks()));
+ Data.HasModifier =
+ (Clause->getModifier() == OMPC_NUMTASKS_strict) ? true : false;
----------------
chandraghale wrote:
@shiltian
We need to check which Clause is present (either GrainsizeClause or
NumTasksClause) and handle the case where no clause is matched. Combining the
conditions would require an extra variable to track the clause type. I suggest
sticking with the current logic, as it is simple and clear. What do you think?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/117196
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
