Fortran: Fix clause splitting for OMP masked taskloop directive
Commit Message
I ran into this bug in the handling of clauses on the combined "masked
taskloop" OMP directive when I was working on something else. The fix
turned out to be a 1-liner. OK for trunk?
-Sandra
Comments
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 08:02:04PM -0600, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> I ran into this bug in the handling of clauses on the combined "masked
> taskloop" OMP directive when I was working on something else. The fix
> turned out to be a 1-liner. OK for trunk?
>
> -Sandra
> commit 17c4fa0bd97c070945004095a06fb7d9e91869e3
> Author: Sandra Loosemore <sandra@codesourcery.com>
> Date: Wed Mar 23 18:45:25 2022 -0700
>
> Fortran: Fix clause splitting for OMP masked taskloop directive
>
> This patch fixes an obvious coding goof that caused all clauses for
> the combined OMP masked taskloop directive to be discarded.
>
> gcc/fortran/
> * trans-openmp.cc (gfc_split_omp_clauses): Fix mask for
> EXEC_OMP_MASKED_TASKLOOP.
>
> gcc/testsuite/
> * gfortran.dg/gomp/masked-taskloop.f90: New.
Ok, thanks.
> +! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump "omp taskloop collapse\\(2\\) grainsize\\(4\\)" "original" } }
Though perhaps the test should be more flexible and allow both orderings of
the clauses and extra clauses too? So:
! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump "omp taskloop \[^\n\r]*grainsize\\(4\\)" "original" } }
! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump "omp taskloop \[^\n\r]*collapse\\(2\\)" "original" } }
?
Jakub
On 3/25/22 20:02, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> I ran into this bug in the handling of clauses on the combined "masked
> taskloop" OMP directive when I was working on something else. The fix
> turned out to be a 1-liner. OK for trunk?
Ping! This one's borderline obvious and would be good to fix in GCC 12.
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2022-March/057705.html
-Sandra
commit 17c4fa0bd97c070945004095a06fb7d9e91869e3
Author: Sandra Loosemore <sandra@codesourcery.com>
Date: Wed Mar 23 18:45:25 2022 -0700
Fortran: Fix clause splitting for OMP masked taskloop directive
This patch fixes an obvious coding goof that caused all clauses for
the combined OMP masked taskloop directive to be discarded.
gcc/fortran/
* trans-openmp.cc (gfc_split_omp_clauses): Fix mask for
EXEC_OMP_MASKED_TASKLOOP.
gcc/testsuite/
* gfortran.dg/gomp/masked-taskloop.f90: New.
@@ -5998,7 +5998,7 @@ gfc_split_omp_clauses (gfc_code *code,
innermost = GFC_OMP_SPLIT_DO;
break;
case EXEC_OMP_MASKED_TASKLOOP:
- mask = GFC_OMP_SPLIT_MASKED | GFC_OMP_SPLIT_TASKLOOP;
+ mask = GFC_OMP_MASK_MASKED | GFC_OMP_MASK_TASKLOOP;
innermost = GFC_OMP_SPLIT_TASKLOOP;
break;
case EXEC_OMP_MASTER_TASKLOOP:
new file mode 100644
@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+! { dg-do compile }
+! { dg-additional-options "-fopenmp -fdump-tree-original" }
+
+! There was a bug in the clause splitting for the "masked taskloop"
+! combined directive that caused it to lose all the clauses.
+
+subroutine s1 (a1, a2)
+ integer :: a1, a2
+ integer :: i, j
+
+ !$omp masked taskloop collapse(2) grainsize(4)
+ do i = 1, a1
+ do j = 1, a2
+ end do
+ end do
+
+end subroutine
+
+! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump "omp taskloop collapse\\(2\\) grainsize\\(4\\)" "original" } }