[ping] Hi Jakub, I don't think we ever got approval for the Fortran parts of the OpenACC tile patch? Is this okay for trunk? I'll be committing all parts of the patch once the Fortran parts are approved.
Thanks, Chung-Lin On 2016/12/14 04:37 PM, Chung-Lin Tang wrote: > On 2016/11/30 10:47 AM, Cesar Philippidis wrote: >> On 11/18/2016 03:24 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >>> On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 08:51:00AM -0800, Cesar Philippidis wrote: >>>> On 11/11/2016 02:34 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >>>>> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 06:46:46PM +0800, Chung-Lin Tang wrote: >>>> >>>> And here's the patch. >>> >>> The patch doesn't look like OpenACC tile clause fortran support, >>> but bind/nohost clause C/C++ support. >> >> I think I got that patch mixed up with the acc routines patch. Here is >> the fortran tile clause patch. >> >> One notable difference between the trunk and gomp4 implementation of the >> tile clause is that gomp4 errors on negative value tile arguments, >> whereas trunk issues warnings. Is there a reason why the fortran FE >> generally emits a warning, on say num_threads(-5), instead of an error? >> >> Chung-Lin, I noticed in your source tree that you included a change to >> gfortranspec.c. Is that necessary for trunk? I've included in this patch >> just in case the other tile patches require it. >> >> Cesar >> > > About the gfortranspec.c change, that's just a testing artifact, not part of > the Fortran FE patch. > > Chung-Lin >
