https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34582
Jose Manuel Monsalve Diaz <jo...@udel.edu> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--- Comment #1 from Jose Manuel Monsalve Diaz <jo...@udel.edu> ---
The problem boils down to the implicit mapping that occurs in the second
#pragma omp target. This implicit mapping is like having map(tofrom: a1d[0:N]).
Which goes agains the original mapping.
#pragma omp target data map(from: a1d[1:])
{
#pragma omp target map(tofrom: isHost)
{
// Some aid[] use.
}
}
Is equal to
#pragma omp target data map(from: a1d[1:])
{
#pragma omp target map(tofrom: isHost) map(tofrom: a1d[0:N])
{
// Some aid[] use.
}
}
This is generating a conflict. Even though the specs in the mapping section are
pretty clear what to do with respect to the reference counting, it doesn't say
anything regarding implicit mapping of a variable that is already in the table.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug._______________________________________________
llvm-bugs mailing list
llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
