I ran into this bug in the handling of clauses on the combined "masked taskloop" OMP directive when I was working on something else. The fix turned out to be a 1-liner. OK for trunk?

-Sandra
commit 17c4fa0bd97c070945004095a06fb7d9e91869e3
Author: Sandra Loosemore <san...@codesourcery.com>
Date:   Wed Mar 23 18:45:25 2022 -0700

    Fortran: Fix clause splitting for OMP masked taskloop directive
    
    This patch fixes an obvious coding goof that caused all clauses for
    the combined OMP masked taskloop directive to be discarded.
    
    	gcc/fortran/
    	* trans-openmp.cc (gfc_split_omp_clauses): Fix mask for
    	EXEC_OMP_MASKED_TASKLOOP.
    
    	gcc/testsuite/
    	* gfortran.dg/gomp/masked-taskloop.f90: New.

diff --git a/gcc/fortran/trans-openmp.cc b/gcc/fortran/trans-openmp.cc
index 101924f..25dde82 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/trans-openmp.cc
+++ b/gcc/fortran/trans-openmp.cc
@@ -5998,7 +5998,7 @@ gfc_split_omp_clauses (gfc_code *code,
       innermost = GFC_OMP_SPLIT_DO;
       break;
     case EXEC_OMP_MASKED_TASKLOOP:
-      mask = GFC_OMP_SPLIT_MASKED | GFC_OMP_SPLIT_TASKLOOP;
+      mask = GFC_OMP_MASK_MASKED | GFC_OMP_MASK_TASKLOOP;
       innermost = GFC_OMP_SPLIT_TASKLOOP;
       break;
     case EXEC_OMP_MASTER_TASKLOOP:
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/gomp/masked-taskloop.f90 b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/gomp/masked-taskloop.f90
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6fb7111
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/gomp/masked-taskloop.f90
@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+! { dg-do compile }
+! { dg-additional-options "-fopenmp -fdump-tree-original" }
+
+! There was a bug in the clause splitting for the "masked taskloop"
+! combined directive that caused it to lose all the clauses.
+
+subroutine s1 (a1, a2)
+  integer :: a1, a2
+  integer :: i, j
+
+  !$omp masked taskloop collapse(2) grainsize(4)
+  do i = 1, a1
+    do j = 1, a2
+    end do
+  end do
+
+end subroutine
+
+! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump "omp taskloop collapse\\(2\\) grainsize\\(4\\)" "original" } }

Reply via email to