On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 04:45:07PM +0200, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> Fixed subject line: "absent linear" should be "absent linear step" in the
> subject line;
> i.e. with "step" added: "Fortran: OpenMP fix declare simd inside modules and
> absent linear step [PR106566]"
>
> I have also decided to move the 'step = 1' to openmp.cc, which also set it
> before with
> the old pre-OpenMP 5.2 syntax.
>
> I also added a pre-OpenMP-5.2-syntax example.
>
> * * *
>
> For GCC 12 (and GCC 11), only the '%s' fix and the third, now added example
> apply;
> for the 5.1 syntax, 'step' was already set.
>
> OK? And thoughts regarding the backports (none? Only 12? Or 11+12?)?
>
> Tobias
> -----------------
> Siemens Electronic Design Automation GmbH; Anschrift: Arnulfstraße 201, 80634
> München; Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung; Geschäftsführer: Thomas
> Heurung, Frank Thürauf; Sitz der Gesellschaft: München; Registergericht
> München, HRB 106955
> Fortran: OpenMP fix declare simd inside modules and absent linear step
> [PR106566]
>
> gcc/fortran/ChangeLog:
>
> PR fortran/106566
> * openmp.cc (gfc_match_omp_clauses): Fix setting linear-step value
> to 1 when not specified.
> (gfc_match_omp_declare_simd): Accept module procedures.
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>
> PR fortran/106566
> * gfortran.dg/gomp/declare-simd-4.f90: New test.
> * gfortran.dg/gomp/declare-simd-5.f90: New test.
> * gfortran.dg/gomp/declare-simd-6.f90: New test.
>
> gcc/fortran/openmp.cc | 10 +++--
> gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/gomp/declare-simd-4.f90 | 42 +++++++++++++++++++
> gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/gomp/declare-simd-5.f90 | 49
> +++++++++++++++++++++++
> gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/gomp/declare-simd-6.f90 | 42 +++++++++++++++++++
> 4 files changed, 140 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/fortran/openmp.cc b/gcc/fortran/openmp.cc
> index a7eb6c3e8f4..594907714ff 100644
> --- a/gcc/fortran/openmp.cc
> +++ b/gcc/fortran/openmp.cc
> @@ -2480,7 +2480,7 @@ gfc_match_omp_clauses (gfc_omp_clauses **cp, const
> omp_mask mask,
> goto error;
> }
> }
> - else
> + if (step == NULL)
> {
> step = gfc_get_constant_expr (BT_INTEGER,
> gfc_default_integer_kind,
Ah, didn't know that gfc_match ("%e ) ", &step) will free and clear
step if it successfully matched it first and then doesn't match ) after it.
So ok.
> @@ -4213,9 +4213,13 @@ gfc_match_omp_declare_simd (void)
> gfc_omp_declare_simd *ods;
> bool needs_space = false;
>
> - switch (gfc_match (" ( %s ) ", &proc_name))
> + switch (gfc_match (" ( "))
> {
> - case MATCH_YES: break;
> + case MATCH_YES:
> + if (gfc_match_symbol (&proc_name, /* host assoc = */ true) != MATCH_YES
> + || gfc_match (" ) ") != MATCH_YES)
> + return MATCH_ERROR;
> + break;
> case MATCH_NO: proc_name = NULL; needs_space = true; break;
> case MATCH_ERROR: return MATCH_ERROR;
> }
LGTM.
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/gomp/declare-simd-4.f90
> b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/gomp/declare-simd-4.f90
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000000..44132525963
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/gomp/declare-simd-4.f90
> @@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
> +! { dg-do compile }
> +! { dg-additional-options "-fdump-tree-gimple" }
> +!
> +! PR fortran/106566
> +!
> +! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "__attribute__\\(\\(omp declare simd
> \\(linear\\(0:ref,step\\(4\\)\\) simdlen\\(8\\)\\)\\)\\)" 2 "gimple" } }
> +! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "__attribute__\\(\\(omp declare simd
> \\(linear\\(0:ref,step\\(8\\)\\) simdlen\\(8\\)\\)\\)\\)" 2 "gimple" } }
> +
> +subroutine add_one2(p)
> + implicit none
> + !$omp declare simd(add_one2) linear(p: ref) simdlen(8)
> + integer :: p
Wonder if it wouldn't be better to use integer(kind=4) explicitly
when you try to match the size of that multiplied by 1 or 2 in
dg-final, as say with -fdefault-integer-8 this will fail miserably
otherwise. Ditto in other spots in this as well as other tests.
Ok with/without that change.
As for backports, I'd wait some time with just trunk and then
backport wherever you are willing to test it.
Jakub
