On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 11:49:50PM +0200, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> I lost a bit track. Is this now complete in terms of F2003 and the only
> missing bits is the support for devices and the test case for alignment? Or
> is something else pending?
I have still some pending questions with omp lang committee.
Some are related to UDRs, some ASSOCIATE related questions (about
copyprivate e.g.), what does it mean if POINTER shows up in reduction
clause, I think we don't handle array linear right now and there are some
questions related to that.
> >+ case OMP_LIST_PRIVATE:
> >+ case OMP_LIST_LASTPRIVATE:
> >+ case OMP_LIST_LINEAR:
> >+ /* case OMP_LIST_REDUCTION: */
> >+ gfc_error ("INTENT(IN) POINTER '%s' in %s clause at %L",
> >+ n->sym->name, name, where);
>
> Why is OMP_LIST_REDUCTION commented?
See above, still don't know what pointer reduction should really mean.
> >@@ -822,6 +825,8 @@ struct GTY(()) lang_decl {
> > tree span;
> > /* For assumed-shape coarrays. */
> > tree token, caf_offset;
> >+ unsigned int scalar_allocatable : 1;
> >+ unsigned int scalar_pointer : 1;
> > };
>
> I think this flag can also be used in dwarf2out for to set
> DW_AT_allocated/DW_AT_associated [cf. PR59438 (a)], which would be nice.
> Does one need to take any care with LTO for either OpenMP or DWARF symbols?
> (I think one don't as it comes later, but I might have missed some fine
> print.)
Yes, supposedly a langhook could handle this, similarly to how e.g.
the get_array_descr_info langhook handles it (and, LTO doesn't handle
the Fortran arrays yet either). But, the array langhook can't be used for
this, because it works on types rather than decls. In DWARF the attributes
belong on the type, so supposedly dwarf2out.c when langhook says some decl
is allocatable or associated should create a DW_AT_type variant for it with
that attribute set.
Jakub
