[cfe-dev] [OMP] Clang fails to handle parallel for + collapse
Alexey Bataev via cfe-dev
cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
Thu Feb 18 11:00:17 PST 2016
Hal, yes, this one also must be committed to release branch. Could you
ask Hans to commit it?
Best regards,
Alexey Bataev
=============
Software Engineer
Intel Compiler Team
18.02.2016 17:26, Hal Finkel пишет:
> Hi Alexey,
>
> Have all of the recent OpenMP fixes made it into the release branch. Should this one?
>
> -Hal
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Alexey Bataev via cfe-dev" <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>> To: "Jonas Hahnfeld" <Hahnfeld at itc.rwth-aachen.de>, "Samuel Pitoiset" <samuel.pitoiset at gmail.com>
>> Cc: cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2016 7:53:26 AM
>> Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] [OMP] Clang fails to handle parallel for + collapse
>>
>> Fixed in r261209
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Alexey Bataev
>> =============
>> Software Engineer
>> Intel Compiler Team
>>
>> 17.02.2016 14:39, Hahnfeld, Jonas пишет:
>>> Hi Alexey,
>>>
>>> I think this reveals another bug: q isn't correctly lastprivate and
>>> in the end doesn't hold buf2 + 8.
>>> This may be related to collapse(2) because it works fine if I
>>> remove that clause...
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Jonas
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: cfe-dev [mailto:cfe-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of
>>>> Alexey
>>>> Bataev via cfe-dev
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2016 11:35 AM
>>>> To: Samuel Pitoiset; cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] [OMP] Clang fails to handle parallel for +
>>>> collapse
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>> Thanks for the report. Problem fixed in r261080
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Alexey Bataev
>>>> =============
>>>> Software Engineer
>>>> Intel Compiler Team
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 16.02.2016 17:49, Samuel Pitoiset via cfe-dev пишет:
>>>>> Hi there,
>>>>>
>>>>> It seems like Clang fails to create a OMPParallelForDirective
>>>>> object
>>>>> for the given GCC test sample:
>>>>> https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/blob/master/libgomp/testsuite/libgom
>>>>> p.c/loop-9.c
>>>>>
>>>>> I just tried to dump the AST with clang cc1 -ast-dump -fopenmp
>>>>> loop-9.c, and the output is:
>>>>>
>>>>> TranslationUnitDecl 0x3a53eb0 <<invalid sloc>> <invalid sloc>
>>>>> |-TypedefDecl 0x3a543c8 <<invalid sloc>> <invalid sloc> implicit
>>>>> __int128_t '__int128'
>>>>> | `-BuiltinType 0x3a54100 '__int128'
>>>>> |-TypedefDecl 0x3a54428 <<invalid sloc>> <invalid sloc> implicit
>>>>> __uint128_t 'unsigned __int128'
>>>>> | `-BuiltinType 0x3a54120 'unsigned __int128'
>>>>> |-TypedefDecl 0x3a546e8 <<invalid sloc>> <invalid sloc> implicit
>>>>> __NSConstantString 'struct __NSConstantString_tag'
>>>>> | `-RecordType 0x3a54500 'struct __NSConstantString_tag'
>>>>> | `-Record 0x3a54478 '__NSConstantString_tag'
>>>>> |-TypedefDecl 0x3a54778 <<invalid sloc>> <invalid sloc> implicit
>>>>> __builtin_ms_va_list 'char *'
>>>>> | `-PointerType 0x3a54740 'char *'
>>>>> | `-BuiltinType 0x3a53f40 'char'
>>>>> |-TypedefDecl 0x3a54a28 <<invalid sloc>> <invalid sloc> implicit
>>>>> __builtin_va_list 'struct __va_list_tag [1]'
>>>>> | `-ConstantArrayType 0x3a549d0 'struct __va_list_tag [1]' 1
>>>>> | `-RecordType 0x3a54850 'struct __va_list_tag'
>>>>> | `-Record 0x3a547c8 '__va_list_tag'
>>>>> |-FunctionDecl 0x3aa0780
>>>>> |<tests/gcc-testsuite/libgomp.c/loop-9.c:1:13>
>>>>> col:13 implicit abort 'void (void) __attribute__((noreturn))'
>>>>> extern
>>>>> |-FunctionDecl 0x3aa0828 prev 0x3aa0780 <col:1, col:24> col:13
>>>>> |used
>>>>> abort 'void (void) __attribute__((noreturn))' extern
>>>>> |-VarDecl 0x3aa0948 <line:3:1, col:15> col:6 used buf 'char [8]'
>>>>> |cinit
>>>>> |`-StringLiteral 0x3aa0a28 <col:15> 'char [8]' lvalue "01234567"
>>>>> |-VarDecl 0x3aa0a98 <line:4:1, col:16> col:6 used buf2 'char [8]'
>>>>> |cinit `-StringLiteral 0x3aa0af8 <col:16> 'char [8]' lvalue
>>>>> |"23456789"
>>>>> `-FunctionDecl 0x3aa0bf0 <line:6:1, line:18:1> line:7:1 main 'int
>>>>> (void)'
>>>>> `-CompoundStmt 0x3aa4fe0 <line:8:1, line:18:1>
>>>>> |-DeclStmt 0x3aa0dc0 <line:9:3, col:14>
>>>>> | |-VarDecl 0x3aa0cd8 <col:3, col:9> col:9 used p 'char *'
>>>>> | `-VarDecl 0x3aa0d48 <col:3, col:13> col:13 used q 'char *'
>>>>> |-DeclStmt 0x3aa0e68 <line:10:3, col:14>
>>>>> | `-VarDecl 0x3aa0de8 <col:3, col:13> col:7 used sum 'int'
>>>>> | cinit
>>>>> | `-IntegerLiteral 0x3aa0e48 <col:13> 'int' 0
>>>>> |-IfStmt 0x3aa4f78 <line:15:3, line:16:12>
>>>>> | |-<<<NULL>>>
>>>>> | |-BinaryOperator 0x3aa4e98 <line:15:7, col:47> 'int' '||'
>>>>> | | |-BinaryOperator 0x3aa4de8 <col:7, col:35> 'int' '||'
>>>>> | | | |-BinaryOperator 0x3aa4cd0 <col:7, col:18> 'int' '!='
>>>>> | | | | |-ImplicitCastExpr 0x3aa4cb8 <col:7> 'char *'
>>>>> <LValueToRValue>
>>>>> | | | | | `-DeclRefExpr 0x3aa4be8 <col:7> 'char *' lvalue
>>>>> | | | | | Var
>>>>> 0x3aa0cd8 'p' 'char *'
>>>>> | | | | `-UnaryOperator 0x3aa4c98 <col:12, col:18> 'char *'
>>>>> | | | | prefix
>>>>> '&'
>>>>> | | | | `-ArraySubscriptExpr 0x3aa4c70 <col:13, col:18>
>>>>> | | | | 'char'
>>>>> lvalue
>>>>> | | | | |-ImplicitCastExpr 0x3aa4c58 <col:13> 'char *'
>>>>> <ArrayToPointerDecay>
>>>>> | | | | | `-DeclRefExpr 0x3aa4c10 <col:13> 'char [8]'
>>>>> | | | | | lvalue
>>>>> Var 0x3aa0948 'buf' 'char [8]'
>>>>> | | | | `-IntegerLiteral 0x3aa4c38 <col:17> 'int' 8
>>>>> | | | `-BinaryOperator 0x3aa4dc0 <col:23, col:35> 'int' '!='
>>>>> | | | |-ImplicitCastExpr 0x3aa4da8 <col:23> 'char *'
>>>>> <LValueToRValue>
>>>>> | | | | `-DeclRefExpr 0x3aa4cf8 <col:23> 'char *' lvalue
>>>>> | | | | Var
>>>>> 0x3aa0d48 'q' 'char *'
>>>>> | | | `-BinaryOperator 0x3aa4d80 <col:28, col:35> 'char *'
>>>>> | | | '+'
>>>>> | | | |-ImplicitCastExpr 0x3aa4d68 <col:28> 'char *'
>>>>> <ArrayToPointerDecay>
>>>>> | | | | `-DeclRefExpr 0x3aa4d20 <col:28> 'char [8]'
>>>>> | | | | lvalue Var
>>>>> 0x3aa0a98 'buf2' 'char [8]'
>>>>> | | | `-IntegerLiteral 0x3aa4d48 <col:35> 'int' 8
>>>>> | | `-BinaryOperator 0x3aa4e70 <col:40, col:47> 'int' '!='
>>>>> | | |-ImplicitCastExpr 0x3aa4e58 <col:40> 'int'
>>>>> | | |<LValueToRValue>
>>>>> | | | `-DeclRefExpr 0x3aa4e10 <col:40> 'int' lvalue Var
>>>>> 0x3aa0de8 'sum' 'int'
>>>>> | | `-IntegerLiteral 0x3aa4e38 <col:47> 'int' 576
>>>>> | |-CallExpr 0x3aa4f50 <line:16:5, col:12> 'void'
>>>>> | | `-ImplicitCastExpr 0x3aa4f38 <col:5> 'void (*)(void)
>>>>> __attribute__((noreturn))' <FunctionToPointerDecay>
>>>>> | | `-DeclRefExpr 0x3aa4ee0 <col:5> 'void (void)
>>>>> __attribute__((noreturn))' Function 0x3aa0828 'abort' 'void
>>>>> (void)
>>>>> __attribute__((noreturn))'
>>>>> | `-<<<NULL>>>
>>>>> `-ReturnStmt 0x3aa4fc8 <line:17:3, col:10>
>>>>> `-IntegerLiteral 0x3aa4fa8 <col:10> 'int' 0
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> As you can see, there is no OMPParallelForDirective.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is it a bug in Clang? Or maybe the OMPParallelForDirective is not
>>>>> created because the loop doesn't respect the canonical form
>>>>> described
>>>>> by the OpenMP spec? In this case, it should be much better to
>>>>> return
>>>>> an error message like "for is not canonical" or something.
>>>>>
>>>>> This test can be compiled with GCC 5.3.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> cfe-dev mailing list
>>>> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
>>>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>> _______________________________________________
>> cfe-dev mailing list
>> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>>
More information about the cfe-dev
mailing list