[Flang] Implement semantic check for privatization of statement function variables #54677
Assignees
Labels
Comments
|
@llvm/issue-subscribers-flang-frontend |
|
@llvm/issue-subscribers-openmp |
shiltian
changed the title
tblah
added a commit
to tblah/llvm-project
that referenced
this issue
Aug 29, 2024
OpenMP prohibits privatisation of variables that appear in expressions for statement functions. This is a re-working of an old patch https://reviews.llvm.org/D93213 by @praveen-g-ctt. The old patch couldn't be landed because of ordering concerns. Statement functions are rewritten during parse tree rewriting, but this was done after resolve-directives and so some array expressions were incorrectly identified as statement functions. For this reason **I have opted to re-order the semantics driver so that resolve-directives is run after parse tree rewriting**. Closes llvm#54677 Co-authored-by: Praveen <praveen@compilertree.com>
tblah
added a commit
to tblah/llvm-project
that referenced
this issue
Oct 2, 2024
OpenMP prohibits privatisation of variables that appear in expressions for statement functions. This is a re-working of an old patch https://reviews.llvm.org/D93213 by @praveen-g-ctt. The old patch couldn't be landed because of ordering concerns. Statement functions are rewritten during parse tree rewriting, but this was done after resolve-directives and so some array expressions were incorrectly identified as statement functions. For this reason **I have opted to re-order the semantics driver so that resolve-directives is run after parse tree rewriting**. Closes llvm#54677 Co-authored-by: Praveen <praveen@compilertree.com>
tblah
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 4, 2024
OpenMP prohibits privatisation of variables that appear in expressions for statement functions. This is a re-working of an old patch https://reviews.llvm.org/D93213 by @praveen-g-ctt. The old patch couldn't be landed because of ordering concerns. Statement functions are rewritten during parse tree rewriting, but this was done after resolve-directives and so some array expressions were incorrectly identified as statement functions. For this reason **I have opted to re-order the semantics driver so that resolve-directives is run after parse tree rewriting**. Closes #54677 --------- Co-authored-by: Praveen <praveen@compilertree.com>
|
@llvm/issue-subscribers-flang-ir Author: Kiran Chandramohan (kiranchandramohan)
The [OpenMP standard](https://www.openmp.org/wp-content/uploads/OpenMP-API-Specification-5-2.pdf) (page 108, Section 4.3) says that "Variables that appear in namelist statements, in variable format expressions, and in expressions for statement function definitions, must not be privatized."
This check was implemented in https://reviews.llvm.org/D93213. This has to be reverted due to some ordering issues. This ticket is a reminder to re-implement this check. |
xgupta
pushed a commit
to xgupta/llvm-project
that referenced
this issue
Oct 4, 2024
…06550) OpenMP prohibits privatisation of variables that appear in expressions for statement functions. This is a re-working of an old patch https://reviews.llvm.org/D93213 by @praveen-g-ctt. The old patch couldn't be landed because of ordering concerns. Statement functions are rewritten during parse tree rewriting, but this was done after resolve-directives and so some array expressions were incorrectly identified as statement functions. For this reason **I have opted to re-order the semantics driver so that resolve-directives is run after parse tree rewriting**. Closes llvm#54677 --------- Co-authored-by: Praveen <praveen@compilertree.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
The OpenMP standard (page 108, Section 4.3) says that "Variables that appear in namelist statements, in variable format expressions, and in expressions for statement function definitions, must not be privatized."
This check was implemented in https://reviews.llvm.org/D93213. This has to be reverted due to some ordering issues.
This ticket is a reminder to re-implement this check.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: