[Openmp-commits] [openmp] [mlir] [flang] [Flang][OpenMP] Initial mapping of Fortran pointers and allocatables for target devices (PR #71766)

[Sergio Afonso via Openmp-commits]

================
@@ -1747,21 +1746,185 @@ void collectMapDataFromMapOperands(MapInfoData &mapData,
         mapData.BasePointers.push_back(mapData.OriginalValue.back());
       }
 
-      mapData.Sizes.push_back(getSizeInBytes(dl, mapOp.getVarType(), mapOp,
-                                             builder, moduleTranslation));
       mapData.BaseType.push_back(
           moduleTranslation.convertType(mapOp.getVarType()));
+      mapData.Sizes.push_back(getSizeInBytes(
+          dl, mapOp.getVarType(), mapOp, mapData.BasePointers.back(),
+          mapData.BaseType.back(), builder, moduleTranslation));
       mapData.MapClause.push_back(mapOp.getOperation());
       mapData.Types.push_back(
           llvm::omp::OpenMPOffloadMappingFlags(mapOp.getMapType().value()));
       mapData.Names.push_back(LLVM::createMappingInformation(
           mapOp.getLoc(), *moduleTranslation.getOpenMPBuilder()));
       mapData.DevicePointers.push_back(
           llvm::OpenMPIRBuilder::DeviceInfoTy::None);
+
+      // Check if this is a member mapping and correctly assign that it is, if
+      // it is a member of a larger object.
+      // TODO: Need better handling of members, and distinguishing of members
+      // that are implicitly allocated on device vs explicitly passed in as
+      // arguments.
+      // TODO: May require some further additions to support nested record
+      // types, i.e. member maps that can have member maps.
+      mapData.IsAMember.push_back(false);
+      for (mlir::Value mapValue : mapOperands) {
+        if (auto map = mlir::dyn_cast_if_present<mlir::omp::MapInfoOp>(
+                mapValue.getDefiningOp())) {
+          for (auto member : map.getMembers()) {
+            if (member == mapOp) {
+              mapData.IsAMember.back() = true;
+            }
+          }
+        }
+      }
     }
   }
 }
 
+static void processMapWithMembersOf(
+    LLVM::ModuleTranslation &moduleTranslation, llvm::IRBuilderBase &builder,
+    llvm::OpenMPIRBuilder &ompBuilder, DataLayout &dl,
+    llvm::OpenMPIRBuilder::MapInfosTy &combinedInfo, MapInfoData &mapData,
+    uint64_t mapDataIndex, bool isTargetParams) {
+  auto parentClause =
+      mlir::dyn_cast<mlir::omp::MapInfoOp>(mapData.MapClause[mapDataIndex]);
+
+  ////////// First Parent Map Segment //////////
----------------
skatrak wrote:

Would it make sense to split these 'segments' into separate functions, so it's a bit easier to follow? Feel free to ignore if you disagree, the function just looks to me to be already split into different logical units.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/71766