jdenny added inline comments.

================
Comment at: clang/lib/CodeGen/CGOpenMPRuntime.cpp:9566
+    MEHandler.generateAllInfo(BasePointers, Pointers, Sizes, MapTypes,
+                              CapturedVarSet, /*PresentModifierOnly=*/true);
 
----------------
ABataev wrote:
> jdenny wrote:
> > ABataev wrote:
> > > jdenny wrote:
> > > > In today's OpenMP/LLVM call, it was pointed out that this issue 
> > > > represents a general Clang bug for map clauses: map clauses generally 
> > > > shouldn't be ignored just because their variables aren't referenced in 
> > > > the construct.
> > > > 
> > > > Here, I tried to handle this issue only in the case of a `present` 
> > > > modifier because I previously didn't consider whether the existing 
> > > > behavior for other map types was a bug.  My solution here was similar 
> > > > to what's done for `omp target data`, which doesn't have captures at 
> > > > all.  Perhaps, this should generalized to other map types.
> > > > 
> > > > Another possibility might be to expand what's captured in Sema.
> > > It must be fixed in a separate patch. We definitely should not modify 
> > > sema here, just the codegen. Currently, it iterates through all captures 
> > > in region, also need to iterate through the explicit maps.
> > Thanks for the response.  I'd be happy to generalize and extract into a new 
> > patch.
> > 
> > It looks like all I need to extract is the changes to `generateAllInfo` and 
> > `emitTargetCall` except I wouldn't have the `PresentModifierOnly` 
> > restriction.  Of course, I would need to add tests.  Does all that sound 
> > about right?  If so, I'll work on it.
> Yes, something like this. Most probably, you won't need to add new tests, 
> just modify the existing ones.
OK, I'm working on this.  One point from the call I'm not confident about:  Is 
this change just for globals or locals too?  That is, which variables in the 
following examples should have map entries?

```
int x;
void fn() {
  int y;
  #pragma omp target map(x,y)
  {
    // no references to x and y are lexically contained
  }
}
```


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D83061/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D83061



_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to