Re: [PATCH] Fix PR64748

2016-02-15 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 08:51:23AM -0600, James Norris wrote: > --- a/gcc/cp/semantics.c > +++ b/gcc/cp/semantics.c > @@ -6683,6 +6683,14 @@ finish_omp_clauses (tree clauses, bool allow_fields, > bool declare_simd) > error ("%qD appears both in data and map clauses", t); >

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR64748

2016-02-15 Thread James Norris
Hi, Ping! Thanks, Jim On 02/02/2016 08:51 AM, James Norris wrote: Hi! On 02/01/2016 02:03 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 01:41:50PM -0600, James Norris wrote: The attached patch resolves c/PR64748. The patch adds the use of parm's with the deviceptr clause. [snip snip

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR64748

2016-02-02 Thread James Norris
Hi! On 02/01/2016 02:03 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 01:41:50PM -0600, James Norris wrote: The attached patch resolves c/PR64748. The patch adds the use of parm's with the deviceptr clause. [snip snip] --- a/gcc/c/c-parser.c +++ b/gcc/c/c-parser.c @@ -10760,7 +10760,7 @@

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR64748

2016-02-01 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 01:41:50PM -0600, James Norris wrote: > The attached patch resolves c/PR64748. The patch > adds the use of parm's with the deviceptr clause. > > Question > > As there is VAR_P (), could there be a PARM_P ()? Not for GCC 6.x, for 7 it is possible. > --- a/gcc/c/c-pars

[PATCH] Fix PR64748

2016-02-01 Thread James Norris
Hi, The attached patch resolves c/PR64748. The patch adds the use of parm's with the deviceptr clause. Question As there is VAR_P (), could there be a PARM_P ()? Or would that obscure something I'm not aware of? Regtested and bootstrapped on x86_64. Thanks, Jim ChangeLog entries...

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR64748

2015-03-13 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 04:24:09PM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > Hi Jeff! > > On Tue, 10 Mar 2015 12:48:34 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > > On 03/10/15 07:36, James Norris wrote: > > > Ping. > > Note that the GCC trunk is in regression bugfix stage, so this patch may > > (is likely?) be deferred unt

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR64748

2015-03-13 Thread Thomas Schwinge
Hi Jeff! On Tue, 10 Mar 2015 12:48:34 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On 03/10/15 07:36, James Norris wrote: > > Ping. > Note that the GCC trunk is in regression bugfix stage, so this patch may > (is likely?) be deferred until the next stage1 development cycle. The decision is with you guys, but my un

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR64748: OpenACC: "is not a variable" error with deviceptr()

2015-03-13 Thread Thomas Schwinge
line: »[PATCH] Fix PR64748: OpenACC: "is not a variable" error with deviceptr()« (copied from the PR) makes it easier to classify your submission, compared to just »[PATCH] Fix PR64748«. Also, it's a good idea to CC the respective maintainers, that is, Jakub for anything related to OpenMP (

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR64748

2015-03-10 Thread Jeff Law
On 03/10/15 07:36, James Norris wrote: Hi! Ping. Note that the GCC trunk is in regression bugfix stage, so this patch may (is likely?) be deferred until the next stage1 development cycle. jeff

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR64748

2015-03-10 Thread James Norris
Hi! Ping. Thanks! On 02/16/2015 12:26 PM, James Norris wrote: This fixes the validation of the argument to the deviceptr clause. Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. OK to commit to trunk? Jim

[PATCH] Fix PR64748

2015-02-16 Thread James Norris
This fixes the validation of the argument to the deviceptr clause. Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. OK to commit to trunk? Jim diff --git a/gcc/c/c-parser.c b/gcc/c/c-parser.c index ceb9e1a..9f0d7af 100644 --- a/gcc/c/c-parser.c +++ b/gcc/c/c-parser.c @@ -10334,11 +1033