[flang-commits] [flang] [flang][OpenMP] Lower `target .. private(..)` to `omp.private` ops (PR #94195)

[Pranav Bhandarkar via flang-commits]

bhandarkar-pranav wrote:


> What I am worried about is whether we want a different style entry in the PrivateClause Operation so that the firstprivate variable can be laid out properly in the privatisation part of the `task_t` structure.

I am afraid I dont really understands what you mean here, specifically when you say "different style entry in PrivateClause Operation". Could you please elaborate?

> Would it make sense to add a TODO/`Not Yet Implemented Error` for all target directives for firstprivate clauses that can be deferred?
I think there's no harm in separating the translation of `private` from `firstprivate` on target constructs by deferring the `firstprivate` work. (Implementing a TODO)
> Separately, you might need something like @luporl's patch for default firstprivate behaviour. #85989
Thank you for bringing to my notice.



https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94195