================
@@ -3474,6 +3477,138 @@ WRAPPER_CLASS(OmpObjectList, std::list<OmpObject>);
#define MODIFIERS() std::optional<std::list<Modifier>>
+inline namespace traits {
+// trait-property-name ->
+// identifier | string-literal
+struct OmpTraitPropertyName {
+ CharBlock source;
+ WRAPPER_CLASS_BOILERPLATE(OmpTraitPropertyName, std::string);
+};
+
+// trait-score ->
+// SCORE(non-negative-const-integer-expression)
+struct OmpTraitScore {
+ CharBlock source;
+ WRAPPER_CLASS_BOILERPLATE(OmpTraitScore, ScalarIntExpr);
+};
+
+// trait-property-extension ->
+// trait-property-name (trait-property-value, ...)
+// trait-property-value ->
+// trait-property-name |
+// scalar-integer-expression |
+// trait-property-extension
+//
+// The grammar in OpenMP 5.2+ spec is ambiguous, the above is a different
+// version (but equivalent) that doesn't have ambiguities.
+// The ambiguity is in
+// trait-property:
+// trait-property-name <- (a)
+// trait-property-clause
+// trait-property-expression <- (b)
+// trait-property-extension <- this conflicts with (a) and (b)
+// trait-property-extension:
+// trait-property-name <- conflict with (a)
+// identifier(trait-property-extension[, trait-property-extension[, ...]])
+// constant integer expression <- conflict with (b)
+//
+struct OmpTraitPropertyExtension {
+ CharBlock source;
+ TUPLE_CLASS_BOILERPLATE(OmpTraitPropertyExtension);
+ struct ExtensionValue {
+ CharBlock source;
+ UNION_CLASS_BOILERPLATE(ExtensionValue);
+ std::variant<OmpTraitPropertyName, ScalarExpr,
+ common::Indirection<OmpTraitPropertyExtension>>
+ u;
+ };
+ using ExtensionList = std::list<ExtensionValue>;
+ std::tuple<OmpTraitPropertyName, ExtensionList> t;
+};
+
+// trait-property ->
+// trait-property-name | OmpClause |
+// trait-property-expression | trait-property-extension
+// trait-property-expression ->
+// scalar-logical-expression | scalar-integer-expression
+//
+// The parser for a logical expression will accept an integer expression,
+// and if it's not logical, it will flag an error later. The same thing
+// will happen if the scalar integer expression sees a logical expresion.
+// To avoid this, parse all expressions as scalar expressions.
+struct OmpTraitProperty {
+ CharBlock source;
+ UNION_CLASS_BOILERPLATE(OmpTraitProperty);
+ std::variant<OmpTraitPropertyName, common::Indirection<OmpClause>,
+ ScalarExpr, // trait-property-expresion
+ OmpTraitPropertyExtension>
+ u;
+};
+
+// trait-selector-name ->
+// KIND | DT // name-list (host, nohost, +/add-def-doc)
+// ISA | DT // name-list (isa_name, ... /impl-defined)
+// ARCH | DT // name-list (arch_name, ... /impl-defined)
+// directive-name | C // no properties
+// SIMD | C // clause-list (from declare_simd)
+// // (at least simdlen, inbranch/notinbranch)
+// DEVICE_NUM | T // device-number
+// UID | T // unique-string-id /impl-defined
+// VENDOR | I // name-list (vendor-id /add-def-doc)
+// EXTENSION | I // name-list (ext_name /impl-defined)
+// ATOMIC_DEFAULT_MEM_ORDER I | // value of admo
+// REQUIRES | I // clause-list (from requires)
+// CONDITION U // logical-expr
+//
+// Trait-set-selectors:
+// [D]evice, [T]arget_device, [C]onstruct, [I]mplementation, [U]ser.
+struct OmpTraitSelectorName {
+ CharBlock source;
+ UNION_CLASS_BOILERPLATE(OmpTraitSelectorName);
+ ENUM_CLASS(Value, Arch, Atomic_Default_Mem_Order, Condition, Device_Num,
+ Extension, Isa, Kind, Requires, Simd, Uid, Vendor)
+ std::variant<Value, llvm::omp::Directive> u;
+};
+
+// trait-selector ->
+// trait-selector-name |
+// trait-selector-name ([trait-score:] trait-property, ...)
+struct OmpTraitSelector {
+ CharBlock source;
+ TUPLE_CLASS_BOILERPLATE(OmpTraitSelector);
+ struct Properties {
+ TUPLE_CLASS_BOILERPLATE(Properties);
+ std::tuple<std::optional<OmpTraitScore>, std::list<OmpTraitProperty>> t;
+ };
+ std::tuple<OmpTraitSelectorName, std::optional<Properties>> t;
+};
+
+// trait-set-selector-name ->
+// CONSTRUCT | DEVICE | IMPLEMENTATION | USER | // since 5.0
+// TARGET_DEVICE // since 5.1
+struct OmpTraitSetSelectorName {
+ CharBlock source;
+ ENUM_CLASS(Value, Construct, Device, Implementation, Target_Device, User)
----------------
kiranchandramohan wrote:
Same question as above.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121815
_______________________________________________
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
