On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 11:43:48AM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> On 2020-11-25T11:10:18+0100, Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 11:00:57AM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> >> I had reason to look into OpenMP C++ 'map' clause parsing, and a
> >> testsuite enhancement to "Add 'g++.dg/gomp/map-{1,2}.C'" fell out of
> >> that, see attached. OK to push?
> >>
> >> Note two XFAILs in 'g++.dg/gomp/map-1.C' compared to the C/C++ variant.
> >> I suppose these are real, and should get resolved at some point?
> >
> > I guess it depends. Do you get a diagnostics if you instantiate the
> > templates? If yes, it is not a bug, [...]
>
> Good point, thanks! Instantiating changes things as follows:
>
> --- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gomp/map-1.C
> +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gomp/map-1.C
> @@ -25 +25 @@ foo (int g[3][10], int h[4][8], int i[2][10], int j[][9],
> - #pragma omp target map(to: bar[2:5]) /* { dg-error "is not a variable"
> "TODO" { xfail *-*-* } } */
> + #pragma omp target map(to: bar[2:5]) /* { dg-error "is not a variable"
> } */
> @@ -111,0 +112,6 @@ foo (int g[3][10], int h[4][8], int i[2][10], int
> j[][9],
> +
> +static void
> +instantiate ()
> +{
> + &foo<0>;
> +}
>
> ..., that is, the first XFAIL disappears (now matches the C/C++ variant),
> but the second remains, see updated patch attached.
Ok, patch ok for trunk.
If you could file a PR for the TODO xfail, I'd appreciate it.
Thanks.
Jakub
