Hi!
On Fri, 27 Nov 2015 12:37:23 +0100, I wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Nov 2015 10:22:16 -0600, James Norris
> wrote:
> > [...]
> Merging your trunk r230722 and r230725 with the existing Fortran OpenACC
> declare implementation present on gomp-4_0-branch, I effectively applied
> the following to gomp-4_
Hi!
On Thu, 19 Nov 2015 10:22:16 -0600, James Norris
wrote:
> --- a/gcc/fortran/dump-parse-tree.c
> +++ b/gcc/fortran/dump-parse-tree.c
Don't you need to handle OMP_LIST_LINK in
gcc/fortran/dump-parse-tree.c:show_omp_clauses; OMP_LIST_DEVICE_RESIDENT
is being handled there (but maps to the wron
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 10:22:16AM -0600, James Norris wrote:
> 2015-XX-XX James Norris
> Cesar Philippidis
>
> gcc/fortran/
> * dump-parse-tree.c (show_namespace): Handle declares.
> * gfortran.h (struct symbol_attribute): New fields.
> (enum gfc_omp_map_map
Jakub,
Here's the updated version of the Fortran changes. More test
cases have been added as well as the issues that Cesar
pointed on in error checking have been addressed (Thanks).
I've also addressed the issue, described below, in dealing
with declare directives when found within a BLOCK constr
On 11/08/2015 08:53 PM, James Norris wrote:
> The attached patch and ChangeLog reflect the updates from your
> review: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-11/msg00714.html
> and Cesar's review:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-11/msg00885.html.
>
> With the changes made in this patch
Cesar,
I only noticed these because I thought I fixed them in the patch you
asked me to revert from gomp-4_0-branch. At the very least, please try
to be consistent on iterating OMP_LIST_*.
Thank you for noticing!
Jakub,
The attached patch and ChangeLog reflect the updates from your
review: ht
On 11/08/2015 07:29 AM, James Norris wrote:
> The attached patch and ChangeLog reflect the updates from your
> review: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-11/msg00714.html.
> All of the issues pointed out, have been address.
>
> With the changes made in this patch I think I'm handling the
> s
Jakub,
The attached patch and ChangeLog reflect the updates from your
review: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-11/msg00714.html.
All of the issues pointed out, have been address.
With the changes made in this patch I think I'm handling the
situation that you pointed out here correctly:
O
Jakub,
On 11/06/2015 01:49 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 01:45:09PM -0600, James Norris wrote:
Okay, I'll fix this.
After fixing, OK to commit?
Thank you for taking the time for the review.
Well, isn't this patch really dependent on the other one?
Yes. Should I combine t
On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 01:45:09PM -0600, James Norris wrote:
> Okay, I'll fix this.
>
> After fixing, OK to commit?
>
> Thank you for taking the time for the review.
Well, isn't this patch really dependent on the other one?
Also, wonder about BLOCK stmt in Fortran, that can give you variables
Jakub,
On 11/06/2015 01:31 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 06:32:00AM -0600, James Norris wrote:
+/* Node in the linked list used for storing !$oacc declare constructs. */
+
+typedef struct gfc_oacc_declare
+{
+ struct gfc_oacc_declare *next;
+ bool module_var;
+ gfc_omp_c
On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 06:32:00AM -0600, James Norris wrote:
> +/* Node in the linked list used for storing !$oacc declare constructs. */
> +
> +typedef struct gfc_oacc_declare
> +{
> + struct gfc_oacc_declare *next;
> + bool module_var;
> + gfc_omp_clauses *clauses;
> + gfc_omp_clauses *retu
Jakub,
Ping
Do you need more information before you can review this patch?
Thanks!
Jim
On 11/04/2015 06:32 AM, James Norris wrote:
This patch updates the processing of OpenACC declare directive for
Fortran in the following areas:
1) module support
2) device_resi
13 matches
Mail list logo
