Re: [PR middle-end/71373] Handle more OMP_CLAUSE_* in nested function decomposition

2016-06-02 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 06:20:57PM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > relevant. Nested function decomposition is not applicable to C++, so we > don't need any C++ test cases, right? C++ has lambdas, but those are already lowered in the FE, so yes, from the OpenMP/OpenACC FEs, tree-nested.c is only u

Re: [PR middle-end/71373] Handle more OMP_CLAUSE_* in nested function decomposition

2016-06-02 Thread Thomas Schwinge
Hi! On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 17:12:17 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 05:06:42PM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > Here are the OpenACC bits of . > > > > As we're currently not paying attention to OpenACC tile clauses in the > > middle end, and thus OM

Re: [PR middle-end/71373] Handle more OMP_CLAUSE_* in nested function decomposition

2016-06-01 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 05:06:42PM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > Here are the OpenACC bits of . > > As we're currently not paying attention to OpenACC tile clauses in the > middle end, and thus OMP_CLAUSE_TILE's arguments are not to be considered > stable, I opted to