[Openmp-commits] [PATCH] D86119: [OPENMP50]Allow overlapping mapping in target constrcuts.

[Alexey Bataev via Phabricator via Openmp-commits]

ABataev added inline comments.


================
Comment at: openmp/libomptarget/src/omptarget.cpp:233
         MapperComponents
-            .Components[target_data_function == targetDataEnd ? I : E - I - 1];
+            .Components[target_data_function == targetDataEnd ? E - I - 1 : I];
     MapperArgsBase[I] = C.Base;
----------------
ABataev wrote:
> ye-luo wrote:
> > ye-luo wrote:
> > > ABataev wrote:
> > > > ye-luo wrote:
> > > > > ABataev wrote:
> > > > > > grokos wrote:
> > > > > > > What is the current status of the order of the arguments clang emits? Is it still necessary to traverse arguments in reverse order here?
> > > > > > Yes, still required
> > > > > Based on the conversation in
> > > > > https://reviews.llvm.org/D85216
> > > > > This line of code neither before nor after the change plays well.
> > > > > Shall we fix the order in targetDataEnd first?
> > > > This change is part of this patch and cannot be committed separately. 
> > > I mean could you fix that issue as a parent of this patch?
> > > This change is part of this patch and cannot be committed separately. 
> > 
> > If fixing the reordering is part of this patch, I should have seen "target_data_function == targetDataEnd ?" branches disappear.
> Nope, just with this patch. It reorders the maps and need to change the cleanup order too. 
It works just like constructors/destructors: allocate in direct order, deallocate in reversed to correctly handle map order. 


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D86119/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D86119