Re: [PATCH, Fortran] Use _Float128 rather than __float128 for c_float128 kind

2021-09-17 Thread Tobias Burnus
On 17.09.21 06:02, Sandra Loosemore wrote: On 9/5/21 11:20 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote: Unless the aarch64 maintainers think it is a bug that __float128 is not supported, I think the right solution here is [...] to tie the C_FLOAT128 kind to _Float128 rather than __float128, [...] Here's a new

[PATCH, OpenMP, Fortran] Support in_reduction for Fortran

2021-09-17 Thread Chung-Lin Tang
Hi Jakub, and Fortran folks, this patch does the required adjustments to let 'in_reduction' work for Fortran. Not just for the target directive actually, task directive is also working after this patch. There is a little bit of adjustment in omp-low.c:scan_sharing_clauses: RTL expand of the copy

[Patch] Fortran: Fix -Wno-missing-include-dirs handling [PR55534]

2021-09-17 Thread Tobias Burnus
Short version: * -Wno-missing-include-dirs had no effect as the warning was always on * For CPP-only options like -idirafter, no warning was shown. This patch tries to address both, i.e. cpp's include-dir diagnostics are shown as well – and silencing the diagnostic works as well. OK for mainlin

[committed] Fortran: Prefer GCC internal macros to float.h in ISO_Fortran_binding.h (was: [PATCH, Fortran] Revert to non-multilib-specific ISO_Fortran_binding.h)

2021-09-17 Thread Tobias Burnus
On 17.09.21 08:03, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: On Tue, 14 Sep 2021, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: And, related, does the following make sense and fixes the issue? --- a/libgfortran/ISO_Fortran_binding.h +++ b/libgfortran/ISO_Fortran_binding.h @@ -228,5 +228,5 @@ extern int CFI_setpointer (CFI_cdesc_t *, CFI

Re: [PATCH, OpenMP, Fortran] Support in_reduction for Fortran

2021-09-17 Thread Jakub Jelinek via Fortran
On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 07:57:38PM +0800, Chung-Lin Tang wrote: > 2021-09-17 Chung-Lin Tang > > gcc/fortran/ChangeLog: > > * openmp.c (gfc_match_omp_clause_reduction): Add 'openmp_target' default > false parameter. Add 'always,tofrom' map for OMP_LIST_IN_REDUCTION case. > (gf

Re: [Patch] Fortran: Fix -Wno-missing-include-dirs handling [PR55534]

2021-09-17 Thread Tobias Burnus
I seemingly messed up a bit in previous patch – corrected version attached. OK? Tobias PS: Due to now enabling the missing-include-dir warning also for cpp,the following warning show up during build. This seems to be specific to libgfortran building, libgomp works and real-world code also does

[PATCH, committed] PR fortran/102366] [10/11/12 Regression] large arrays no longer become static

2021-09-17 Thread Harald Anlauf via Fortran
The attempt to fix a misleading warning lead to a regression that prevented putting large variables in the main into static storage. So instead of preventing the move, we now disable the useless warning for variables in the main. Regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. The patch was ok'ed in the PR by

[Patch] Fortran/OpenMP: unconstrained/reproducible ordered modifier

2021-09-17 Thread Tobias Burnus
This patch adds Fortran support for the new OpenMP 5.1 unconstrained and reproducible modifiers to ordered(concurrent). This patch requires Jakub's patch to handle the middle-end (and C/C++) part, which still has to be committed. The testcases are based on the C/C++ ones. OK? Tobias -

Re: [committed] Fortran: Prefer GCC internal macros to float.h in ISO_Fortran_binding.h (was: [PATCH, Fortran] Revert to non-multilib-specific ISO_Fortran_binding.h)

2021-09-17 Thread Gerald Pfeifer
On Fri, 17 Sep 2021, Tobias Burnus wrote: > I have now committed the attached patch as r12-3621. It includes the > patch by Sandra > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-September/579372.html > (approved 3 days ago) plus adding the "== 53" similar to above. Thank you, Tobias; thank you,