Hi!
The depend(source) clause has NULL OMP_CLAUSE_DECL, it has just the
depend kind specified and no arguments. So copy_tree_body_r shouldn't
check TREE_CODE on it without checking it is non-NULL.
Tested on x86_64-linux, committed to trunk.
2021-06-08 Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com>
PR c++/100957
* tree-inline.c (copy_tree_body_r): For OMP_CLAUSE_DEPEND don't
check TREE_CODE if OMP_CLAUSE_DECL is NULL.
* g++.dg/gomp/doacross-2.C: New test.
--- gcc/tree-inline.c.jj 2021-06-07 09:25:30.541217037 +0200
+++ gcc/tree-inline.c 2021-06-08 10:40:07.013853127 +0200
@@ -1458,7 +1458,8 @@ copy_tree_body_r (tree *tp, int *walk_su
|| OMP_CLAUSE_CODE (*tp) == OMP_CLAUSE_DEPEND))
{
tree t = OMP_CLAUSE_DECL (*tp);
- if (TREE_CODE (t) == TREE_LIST
+ if (t
+ && TREE_CODE (t) == TREE_LIST
&& TREE_PURPOSE (t)
&& TREE_CODE (TREE_PURPOSE (t)) == TREE_VEC)
{
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gomp/doacross-2.C.jj 2021-06-08 10:43:22.469121933
+0200
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gomp/doacross-2.C 2021-06-08 10:42:39.648720282
+0200
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+// PR c++/100957
+// { dg-do compile }
+
+struct S {
+ S ()
+ {
+ #pragma omp for ordered(2)
+ for (int i = 0; i < 32; ++i)
+ for (int j = 0; j < 32; ++j)
+ {
+ #pragma omp ordered depend(source)
+ ;
+ #pragma omp ordered depend(sink: i - 1, j - 1)
+ }
+ }
+};
Jakub
