================
@@ -1977,9 +1977,10 @@ LogicalResult OrderedRegionOp::verify() {
if (getSimd())
return failure();
- if (auto container = (*this)->getParentOfType<WsloopOp>()) {
- if (!container.getOrderedValAttr() ||
- container.getOrderedValAttr().getInt() != 0)
+ if (auto loopOp = dyn_cast<LoopNestOp>((*this)->getParentOp())) {
----------------
skatrak wrote:
I wasn't too sure, so to be conservative I just replicated the previous
behavior. However, looking at the OpenMP examples documents, I can see this is
allowed:
```c
#pragma omp for ordered
for (i=0; i<n; i++) {
if (i <= 10) {
#pragma omp ordered
work(i);
}
if (i > 10) {
#pragma omp ordered
work(i+1);
}
}
```
So my guess is that it's possible that `omp.ordered.region` appears indirectly
nested inside of an `omp.loop_nest`.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/89211
_______________________________________________
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
