[PATCH] D93205: [Flang][OpenMP 4.5] Add semantic check for OpenMP Do Loop Constructs for single directive

[Yashaswini Hegde via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

yhegde added inline comments.


================
Comment at: flang/lib/Semantics/check-omp-structure.cpp:527
+    if (const parser::Name * name{parser::Unwrap<parser::Name>(ompObject)}) {
+      if (name->symbol == GetContext().loopIV) {
+        context_.Say(name->source,
----------------
kiranchandramohan wrote:
> Does the context have the current directive? If so can we get the loopIV through the directive and avoid the need to store the loopIV field?
I suppose I require OpenMPLoopConstruct and DoConstruct to get loopIndex. dirContext_ gives directivesource and llvm::omp::Directive , directiveEnum. 


================
Comment at: flang/lib/Semantics/check-omp-structure.cpp:153
+  case llvm::omp::OMPD_single:
+    for (const auto &dirContext : dirContext_) {
+      if (dirContext.directive == llvm::omp::Directive::OMPD_do) {
----------------
kiranchandramohan wrote:
> yhegde wrote:
> > kiranchandramohan wrote:
> > > yhegde wrote:
> > > > kiranchandramohan wrote:
> > > > > yhegde wrote:
> > > > > > clementval wrote:
> > > > > > > `dirContext_` act as a stack so do you really intent to go from the bottom of the stack to the top? If so no problem. Just asking. 
> > > > > > Yes. Check on nesting is called only if Do directive present in that stack. 
> > > > > Should this call to HasInvalidWorksharingNesting be similar to the one in OpenMPLoopDirective and happen before pushing the context and not iterate over the entire stack of contexts?
> > > > In OpenMPLoopDirective OMPD_Do context is pushed after calling HasInvalidWorksharingNesting. So I could not do this check in a similar way. 
> > > Is there any issue with pushing the context after calling HasInvalidWorksharingNesting here also?
> > I suppose you mean pushing OMPD_Do context after calling HasInvalidWorksharingNesting ? . If so , then it is not required to push that context later.  Control reaches OpenMPLoopDirective first and then OMPD_single. 
> I was asking whether it is OK to implement it the following way so that we don't have to use FindInEnclosingDirContext function?
> 
> ```
>   if (beginDir.v == llvm::omp::Directive::OMPD_single) {
>     HasInvalidWorksharingNesting(...);
>   }
> 
>   PushContextAndClauseSets(beginDir.source, beginDir.v);
> 
>   switch (beginDir.v) {
>   case llvm::omp::OMPD_parallel:
>     CheckNoBranching(block, llvm::omp::OMPD_parallel, beginDir.source);
>     break;
>   default:
>     break;
>   }
> }
> ```
FindEnclosingDirContext function can check any restrictive directives for "single" , like "critical" or "task"  - if in case it is required to check .  Otherwise I can call  

if (beginDir.v == llvm::omp::Directive::OMPD_single) {
    HasInvalidWorksharingNesting(HasInvalidWorksharingNesting(
          beginDir.source, {llvm::omp::Directive::OMPD_do}););
  }

before pushing the  PushContextAndClauseSets(beginDir.source, beginDir.v) and get the expected error.



Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D93205/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D93205