TIFitis added inline comments.
================
Comment at: llvm/include/llvm/Frontend/OpenMP/OMPIRBuilder.h:1487
+ // possible, or else at the end of the function.
+ void emitBlock(BasicBlock *BB, Function *CurFn, bool IsFinished = false);
+
----------------
jdoerfert wrote:
> jdoerfert wrote:
> > This does not mention the deletion stuff, etc.
> This talks about creating a new block, but reading the function it seems it
> will just place `\p BB`. Which one is it?
Fixed.
================
Comment at: llvm/lib/Frontend/OpenMP/OMPIRBuilder.cpp:4122
+ Builder.CreateCall(getOrCreateRuntimeFunctionPtr(*MapperFunc),
+ OffloadingArgs);
+ } else {
----------------
jdoerfert wrote:
> Can we at least assert MapperFunc is non null if standalone is true. It seems
> like an invariant almost worth documenting, at least with an assertion +
> message.
Added
================
Comment at: llvm/lib/Frontend/OpenMP/OMPIRBuilder.cpp:4761
+ if (CondConstant)
+ ThenGen(Builder.saveIP(), Builder.saveIP());
+ else
----------------
jdoerfert wrote:
> In the call above you pass the AllocaIP here, now it is both times the
> saveIP. I doubt this is correct. Allocas will end up in the wrong spot, won't
> they? Do we have a test for that?
The CallBacks were ignoring the AllocaIP passed and getting it from the context
instead.
I've updated them to use the CallBack argument instead.
This patch https://reviews.llvm.org/D150860 changes Clang to use this function
for TargetDataCall emission which tests most aspects of it.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D146557/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D146557
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
