Skip to content

[flang][openacc] Allow if clause on atomic directives #135451

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 15, 2025

Conversation

clementval
Copy link
Contributor

The new version of the OpenACC specification will allow the if clause on the atomic directives. Allow it in ACC.td and update the parse node and parser in flang to support it.

OpenACC dialect will need to be updated to support it as well.

@llvmbot llvmbot added flang Flang issues not falling into any other category openacc flang:semantics flang:parser labels Apr 11, 2025
@llvmbot
Copy link
Member

llvmbot commented Apr 11, 2025

@llvm/pr-subscribers-openacc
@llvm/pr-subscribers-flang-semantics

@llvm/pr-subscribers-flang-parser

Author: Valentin Clement (バレンタイン クレメン) (clementval)

Changes

The new version of the OpenACC specification will allow the if clause on the atomic directives. Allow it in ACC.td and update the parse node and parser in flang to support it.

OpenACC dialect will need to be updated to support it as well.


Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/135451.diff

4 Files Affected:

  • (modified) flang/include/flang/Parser/parse-tree.h (+6-4)
  • (modified) flang/lib/Parser/openacc-parsers.cpp (+14-11)
  • (modified) flang/test/Semantics/OpenACC/acc-atomic-validity.f90 (+32)
  • (modified) llvm/include/llvm/Frontend/OpenACC/ACC.td (+1)
diff --git a/flang/include/flang/Parser/parse-tree.h b/flang/include/flang/Parser/parse-tree.h
index eeb438991feee..0c2a5de3b71d2 100644
--- a/flang/include/flang/Parser/parse-tree.h
+++ b/flang/include/flang/Parser/parse-tree.h
@@ -5244,21 +5244,23 @@ EMPTY_CLASS(AccEndAtomic);
 // ACC ATOMIC READ
 struct AccAtomicRead {
   TUPLE_CLASS_BOILERPLATE(AccAtomicRead);
-  std::tuple<Verbatim, Statement<AssignmentStmt>, std::optional<AccEndAtomic>>
+  std::tuple<Verbatim, AccClauseList, Statement<AssignmentStmt>,
+      std::optional<AccEndAtomic>>
       t;
 };
 
 // ACC ATOMIC WRITE
 struct AccAtomicWrite {
   TUPLE_CLASS_BOILERPLATE(AccAtomicWrite);
-  std::tuple<Verbatim, Statement<AssignmentStmt>, std::optional<AccEndAtomic>>
+  std::tuple<Verbatim, AccClauseList, Statement<AssignmentStmt>,
+      std::optional<AccEndAtomic>>
       t;
 };
 
 // ACC ATOMIC UPDATE
 struct AccAtomicUpdate {
   TUPLE_CLASS_BOILERPLATE(AccAtomicUpdate);
-  std::tuple<std::optional<Verbatim>, Statement<AssignmentStmt>,
+  std::tuple<std::optional<Verbatim>, AccClauseList, Statement<AssignmentStmt>,
       std::optional<AccEndAtomic>>
       t;
 };
@@ -5268,7 +5270,7 @@ struct AccAtomicCapture {
   TUPLE_CLASS_BOILERPLATE(AccAtomicCapture);
   WRAPPER_CLASS(Stmt1, Statement<AssignmentStmt>);
   WRAPPER_CLASS(Stmt2, Statement<AssignmentStmt>);
-  std::tuple<Verbatim, Stmt1, Stmt2, AccEndAtomic> t;
+  std::tuple<Verbatim, AccClauseList, Stmt1, Stmt2, AccEndAtomic> t;
 };
 
 struct OpenACCAtomicConstruct {
diff --git a/flang/lib/Parser/openacc-parsers.cpp b/flang/lib/Parser/openacc-parsers.cpp
index fb731ee52cbba..072eba99826a1 100644
--- a/flang/lib/Parser/openacc-parsers.cpp
+++ b/flang/lib/Parser/openacc-parsers.cpp
@@ -187,22 +187,25 @@ TYPE_PARSER(construct<AccBeginCombinedDirective>(
 // 2.12 Atomic constructs
 TYPE_PARSER(construct<AccEndAtomic>(startAccLine >> "END ATOMIC"_tok))
 
-TYPE_PARSER("ATOMIC" >>
-    construct<AccAtomicRead>(verbatim("READ"_tok) / endAccLine,
-        statement(assignmentStmt), maybe(Parser<AccEndAtomic>{} / endAccLine)))
+TYPE_PARSER("ATOMIC" >> construct<AccAtomicRead>(verbatim("READ"_tok),
+                            Parser<AccClauseList>{} / endAccLine,
+                            statement(assignmentStmt),
+                            maybe(Parser<AccEndAtomic>{} / endAccLine)))
 
-TYPE_PARSER("ATOMIC" >>
-    construct<AccAtomicWrite>(verbatim("WRITE"_tok) / endAccLine,
-        statement(assignmentStmt), maybe(Parser<AccEndAtomic>{} / endAccLine)))
+TYPE_PARSER("ATOMIC" >> construct<AccAtomicWrite>(verbatim("WRITE"_tok),
+                            Parser<AccClauseList>{} / endAccLine,
+                            statement(assignmentStmt),
+                            maybe(Parser<AccEndAtomic>{} / endAccLine)))
 
 TYPE_PARSER("ATOMIC" >>
-    construct<AccAtomicUpdate>(maybe(verbatim("UPDATE"_tok)) / endAccLine,
-        statement(assignmentStmt), maybe(Parser<AccEndAtomic>{} / endAccLine)))
+    construct<AccAtomicUpdate>(maybe(verbatim("UPDATE"_tok)),
+        Parser<AccClauseList>{} / endAccLine, statement(assignmentStmt),
+        maybe(Parser<AccEndAtomic>{} / endAccLine)))
 
 TYPE_PARSER("ATOMIC" >>
-    construct<AccAtomicCapture>(verbatim("CAPTURE"_tok) / endAccLine,
-        statement(assignmentStmt), statement(assignmentStmt),
-        Parser<AccEndAtomic>{} / endAccLine))
+    construct<AccAtomicCapture>(verbatim("CAPTURE"_tok),
+        Parser<AccClauseList>{} / endAccLine, statement(assignmentStmt),
+        statement(assignmentStmt), Parser<AccEndAtomic>{} / endAccLine))
 
 TYPE_PARSER(
     sourced(construct<OpenACCAtomicConstruct>(Parser<AccAtomicRead>{})) ||
diff --git a/flang/test/Semantics/OpenACC/acc-atomic-validity.f90 b/flang/test/Semantics/OpenACC/acc-atomic-validity.f90
index ba68031b0f18b..07fb864695737 100644
--- a/flang/test/Semantics/OpenACC/acc-atomic-validity.f90
+++ b/flang/test/Semantics/OpenACC/acc-atomic-validity.f90
@@ -10,6 +10,7 @@ program openacc_atomic_validity
   integer :: i
   integer, parameter :: N = 256
   integer, dimension(N) :: c
+  logical :: l
 
 
   !$acc parallel
@@ -23,27 +24,58 @@ program openacc_atomic_validity
   !$acc atomic write
   c(i) = 10
 
+  !$acc atomic write if(l)
+  c(i) = 10
+
   !$acc atomic write
   c(i) = 10
   !$acc end atomic
 
+  !$acc atomic write if(.true.)
+  c(i) = 10
+  !$acc end atomic
+
   !$acc atomic read
   i = c(i)
+  
+  !$acc atomic read if(.true.)
+  i = c(i)
 
   !$acc atomic read
   i = c(i)
   !$acc end atomic
 
+  !$acc atomic read if(l) 
+  i = c(i)
+  !$acc end atomic
+
+  !ERROR: FINALIZE clause is not allowed on the ATOMIC READ FINALIZE IF(L)
+  !$acc atomic read finalize if(l) 
+  i = c(i)
+  !$acc end atomic
+
   !$acc atomic capture
   c(i) = i
   i = i + 1
   !$acc end atomic
 
+  !$acc atomic capture if(l .EQV. .false.)
+  c(i) = i
+  i = i + 1
+  !$acc end atomic
+
   !$acc atomic update
   !ERROR: RHS of atomic update statement must be scalar
   !ERROR: LHS of atomic update statement must be scalar
   c = c + 1
 
+  !$acc atomic update if(i == 0)
+  c(i) = c(i) + 1
+
+  !ERROR: At most one IF clause can appear on the ATOMIC UPDATE IF(I == 0) IF(.TRUE.)
+  !$acc atomic update if(i == 0) if(.true.)
+  c(i) = c(i) + 1
+
   !$acc end parallel
 
 end program openacc_atomic_validity
diff --git a/llvm/include/llvm/Frontend/OpenACC/ACC.td b/llvm/include/llvm/Frontend/OpenACC/ACC.td
index 8729d4505205b..c77988b21c1e3 100644
--- a/llvm/include/llvm/Frontend/OpenACC/ACC.td
+++ b/llvm/include/llvm/Frontend/OpenACC/ACC.td
@@ -270,6 +270,7 @@ def ACCC_Unknown : Clause<"unknown"> {
 
 // 2.12
 def ACC_Atomic : Directive<"atomic"> {
+  let allowedOnceClauses = [VersionedClause<ACCC_If, 34>];
   let association = AS_Block;
   let category = CA_Executable;
 }

Copy link
Collaborator

@erichkeane erichkeane left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I can't read any of the parser stuff, but everything looks ok to me anyway.

@clementval
Copy link
Contributor Author

@razvanlupusoru Are you ok with this?

Copy link
Contributor

@razvanlupusoru razvanlupusoru left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you!

@clementval clementval merged commit 13615f7 into llvm:main Apr 15, 2025
16 checks passed
@clementval clementval deleted the acc_atomic_if branch April 15, 2025 18:56
var-const pushed a commit to ldionne/llvm-project that referenced this pull request Apr 17, 2025
The new version of the OpenACC specification will allow the if clause on
the atomic directives. Allow it in `ACC.td` and update the parse node
and parser in flang to support it.

OpenACC dialect will need to be updated to support it as well.
erichkeane added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 18, 2025
#135372)

…uses

The Flang implemenation of OpenACC uses a .td file in the llvm/Frontend
directory to determine appertainment in 4 categories:

-Required: If this list has items in it, the directive requires at least
1 of these be present.

-AllowedExclusive: Items on this list are all allowed, but only 1 from
the list may be here (That is, they are exclusive of eachother).

-AllowedOnce: Items on this list are all allowed, but may not be
duplicated.

Allowed: Items on this list are allowed. Note th at the actual list of
'allowed' is all 4 of these lists together.

This is a draft patch to swtich Clang over to use those tables. Surgery
to get this to happen in Clang Sema was somewhat reasonable. However,
some gaps in the implementations are obvious, the existing clang
implementation disagrees with the Flang interpretation of it. SO, we're
keeping a task list here based on what gets discovered.

Changes to Clang:
- [x] Switch 'directive-kind' enum conversions to use tablegen See
ff1a7bd
- [x] Switch 'clause-kind' enum conversions to use tablegen See
ff1a7bd
- [x] Investigate 'parse' test differences to see if any new
disagreements arise.
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree as to whether 'collapse' can be multiple
times on a loop. Further research showed no prose to limit this, and the
comment on the clang implementation said "no good reason to allow", so
no standards justification.
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree whether 'num_gangs' can appear >1 on a
compute/combined construct. This ended up being an unjustified
restriction.
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree as to the list of required clauses on a 'set'
construct. My research shows that Clang mistakenly included 'if' in the
list, and that it should be just 'default_async', 'device_num', and
'device_type'.
- [x] Order of 'at least one of' diagnostic has changed. Tests were
updated.
- [x] Ensure we are properly 'de-aliasing' clause names in appertainment
checks?
- [x] What is 'shortloop'? 'shortloop' seems to be an old non-standard
extension that isn't supported by flang, but is parsed for backward
compat reasons. Clang won't parse, but we at least have a spot for it in
the clause list.
- [x] Implemented proposed change for 'routine' gang/worker/vector/seq.
(see issue 539)
- [x] Implement init/shutdown can only have 1 'if' (see issue 540)
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree as to whether 'tile' is permitted more than
once on a 'loop' or combined constructs (Flang prohibits >1). I see no
justification for this in the standard. EDIT: I found a comment in clang
that I did this to make SOMETHING around duplicate checks easier.
Discussion showed we should actually have a better behavior around
'device_type' and duplicates, so I've since implemented that.
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree whether 'gang', 'worker', or 'vector' may
appear on the same construct as a 'seq' on a 'loop' or 'combined'. There
is prose for this in 2022: (a gang, worker, or vector clause may not
appear if a 'seq' clause appears). EDIT: These don't actually disagree,
but aren't in the .td file, so I restored the existing code to do this.
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree on whether 'bind' can appear >1 on a
'routine'. I believe line 3096 (A bind clause may not bind to a routine
name that has a visible bind clause) makes this limitation (Flang
permits >1 bind). we discussed and decided this should have the same
rules as worker/vector/etc, except without the 'exactly 1 of' rule (so
no dupes in individual sections).
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree on whether 'init'/'shutdown' can have
multiple 'device_num' clauses. I believe there is no supporting prose
for this limitation., We decided that `device_num` should only happen
1x.
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree whether 'num_gangs' can appear >1 on a
'kernels' construct. Line 1173 (On a kernels construct, the num_gangs
clause must have a single argument) justifies limiting on a
per-arguement basis, but doesn't do so for multiple num_gangs clauses.
WE decided to do this with the '1-per-device-type' region for num_gangs,
num_workers, and vector_length, see openacc bug here:
OpenACC/openacc-spec#541

Changes to Flang:
- [x] Clang/Flang disgree on whether 'atomic' can take an 'if' clause.
This was added in OpenACC3.3_Next See #135451
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree on whether 'finalize' can be allowed >1 times
on a 'exit_data' construct. see #135415.
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree whether 'if_present' should be allowed >1
times on a 'host_data'/'update' construct. see #135422
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree on whether 'init'/'shutdown' can have
multiple 'device_type' clauses. I believe there is no supporting prose
for this limitation.
- [ ] SEE change for num_gangs/etc above.


Changes that need discussion/research:
IanWood1 pushed a commit to IanWood1/llvm-project that referenced this pull request May 6, 2025
llvm#135372)

…uses

The Flang implemenation of OpenACC uses a .td file in the llvm/Frontend
directory to determine appertainment in 4 categories:

-Required: If this list has items in it, the directive requires at least
1 of these be present.

-AllowedExclusive: Items on this list are all allowed, but only 1 from
the list may be here (That is, they are exclusive of eachother).

-AllowedOnce: Items on this list are all allowed, but may not be
duplicated.

Allowed: Items on this list are allowed. Note th at the actual list of
'allowed' is all 4 of these lists together.

This is a draft patch to swtich Clang over to use those tables. Surgery
to get this to happen in Clang Sema was somewhat reasonable. However,
some gaps in the implementations are obvious, the existing clang
implementation disagrees with the Flang interpretation of it. SO, we're
keeping a task list here based on what gets discovered.

Changes to Clang:
- [x] Switch 'directive-kind' enum conversions to use tablegen See
ff1a7bd
- [x] Switch 'clause-kind' enum conversions to use tablegen See
ff1a7bd
- [x] Investigate 'parse' test differences to see if any new
disagreements arise.
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree as to whether 'collapse' can be multiple
times on a loop. Further research showed no prose to limit this, and the
comment on the clang implementation said "no good reason to allow", so
no standards justification.
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree whether 'num_gangs' can appear >1 on a
compute/combined construct. This ended up being an unjustified
restriction.
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree as to the list of required clauses on a 'set'
construct. My research shows that Clang mistakenly included 'if' in the
list, and that it should be just 'default_async', 'device_num', and
'device_type'.
- [x] Order of 'at least one of' diagnostic has changed. Tests were
updated.
- [x] Ensure we are properly 'de-aliasing' clause names in appertainment
checks?
- [x] What is 'shortloop'? 'shortloop' seems to be an old non-standard
extension that isn't supported by flang, but is parsed for backward
compat reasons. Clang won't parse, but we at least have a spot for it in
the clause list.
- [x] Implemented proposed change for 'routine' gang/worker/vector/seq.
(see issue 539)
- [x] Implement init/shutdown can only have 1 'if' (see issue 540)
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree as to whether 'tile' is permitted more than
once on a 'loop' or combined constructs (Flang prohibits >1). I see no
justification for this in the standard. EDIT: I found a comment in clang
that I did this to make SOMETHING around duplicate checks easier.
Discussion showed we should actually have a better behavior around
'device_type' and duplicates, so I've since implemented that.
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree whether 'gang', 'worker', or 'vector' may
appear on the same construct as a 'seq' on a 'loop' or 'combined'. There
is prose for this in 2022: (a gang, worker, or vector clause may not
appear if a 'seq' clause appears). EDIT: These don't actually disagree,
but aren't in the .td file, so I restored the existing code to do this.
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree on whether 'bind' can appear >1 on a
'routine'. I believe line 3096 (A bind clause may not bind to a routine
name that has a visible bind clause) makes this limitation (Flang
permits >1 bind). we discussed and decided this should have the same
rules as worker/vector/etc, except without the 'exactly 1 of' rule (so
no dupes in individual sections).
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree on whether 'init'/'shutdown' can have
multiple 'device_num' clauses. I believe there is no supporting prose
for this limitation., We decided that `device_num` should only happen
1x.
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree whether 'num_gangs' can appear >1 on a
'kernels' construct. Line 1173 (On a kernels construct, the num_gangs
clause must have a single argument) justifies limiting on a
per-arguement basis, but doesn't do so for multiple num_gangs clauses.
WE decided to do this with the '1-per-device-type' region for num_gangs,
num_workers, and vector_length, see openacc bug here:
https://github.com/OpenACC/openacc-spec/issues/541

Changes to Flang:
- [x] Clang/Flang disgree on whether 'atomic' can take an 'if' clause.
This was added in OpenACC3.3_Next See llvm#135451
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree on whether 'finalize' can be allowed >1 times
on a 'exit_data' construct. see llvm#135415.
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree whether 'if_present' should be allowed >1
times on a 'host_data'/'update' construct. see llvm#135422
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree on whether 'init'/'shutdown' can have
multiple 'device_type' clauses. I believe there is no supporting prose
for this limitation.
- [ ] SEE change for num_gangs/etc above.


Changes that need discussion/research:
IanWood1 pushed a commit to IanWood1/llvm-project that referenced this pull request May 6, 2025
llvm#135372)

…uses

The Flang implemenation of OpenACC uses a .td file in the llvm/Frontend
directory to determine appertainment in 4 categories:

-Required: If this list has items in it, the directive requires at least
1 of these be present.

-AllowedExclusive: Items on this list are all allowed, but only 1 from
the list may be here (That is, they are exclusive of eachother).

-AllowedOnce: Items on this list are all allowed, but may not be
duplicated.

Allowed: Items on this list are allowed. Note th at the actual list of
'allowed' is all 4 of these lists together.

This is a draft patch to swtich Clang over to use those tables. Surgery
to get this to happen in Clang Sema was somewhat reasonable. However,
some gaps in the implementations are obvious, the existing clang
implementation disagrees with the Flang interpretation of it. SO, we're
keeping a task list here based on what gets discovered.

Changes to Clang:
- [x] Switch 'directive-kind' enum conversions to use tablegen See
ff1a7bd
- [x] Switch 'clause-kind' enum conversions to use tablegen See
ff1a7bd
- [x] Investigate 'parse' test differences to see if any new
disagreements arise.
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree as to whether 'collapse' can be multiple
times on a loop. Further research showed no prose to limit this, and the
comment on the clang implementation said "no good reason to allow", so
no standards justification.
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree whether 'num_gangs' can appear >1 on a
compute/combined construct. This ended up being an unjustified
restriction.
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree as to the list of required clauses on a 'set'
construct. My research shows that Clang mistakenly included 'if' in the
list, and that it should be just 'default_async', 'device_num', and
'device_type'.
- [x] Order of 'at least one of' diagnostic has changed. Tests were
updated.
- [x] Ensure we are properly 'de-aliasing' clause names in appertainment
checks?
- [x] What is 'shortloop'? 'shortloop' seems to be an old non-standard
extension that isn't supported by flang, but is parsed for backward
compat reasons. Clang won't parse, but we at least have a spot for it in
the clause list.
- [x] Implemented proposed change for 'routine' gang/worker/vector/seq.
(see issue 539)
- [x] Implement init/shutdown can only have 1 'if' (see issue 540)
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree as to whether 'tile' is permitted more than
once on a 'loop' or combined constructs (Flang prohibits >1). I see no
justification for this in the standard. EDIT: I found a comment in clang
that I did this to make SOMETHING around duplicate checks easier.
Discussion showed we should actually have a better behavior around
'device_type' and duplicates, so I've since implemented that.
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree whether 'gang', 'worker', or 'vector' may
appear on the same construct as a 'seq' on a 'loop' or 'combined'. There
is prose for this in 2022: (a gang, worker, or vector clause may not
appear if a 'seq' clause appears). EDIT: These don't actually disagree,
but aren't in the .td file, so I restored the existing code to do this.
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree on whether 'bind' can appear >1 on a
'routine'. I believe line 3096 (A bind clause may not bind to a routine
name that has a visible bind clause) makes this limitation (Flang
permits >1 bind). we discussed and decided this should have the same
rules as worker/vector/etc, except without the 'exactly 1 of' rule (so
no dupes in individual sections).
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree on whether 'init'/'shutdown' can have
multiple 'device_num' clauses. I believe there is no supporting prose
for this limitation., We decided that `device_num` should only happen
1x.
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree whether 'num_gangs' can appear >1 on a
'kernels' construct. Line 1173 (On a kernels construct, the num_gangs
clause must have a single argument) justifies limiting on a
per-arguement basis, but doesn't do so for multiple num_gangs clauses.
WE decided to do this with the '1-per-device-type' region for num_gangs,
num_workers, and vector_length, see openacc bug here:
https://github.com/OpenACC/openacc-spec/issues/541

Changes to Flang:
- [x] Clang/Flang disgree on whether 'atomic' can take an 'if' clause.
This was added in OpenACC3.3_Next See llvm#135451
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree on whether 'finalize' can be allowed >1 times
on a 'exit_data' construct. see llvm#135415.
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree whether 'if_present' should be allowed >1
times on a 'host_data'/'update' construct. see llvm#135422
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree on whether 'init'/'shutdown' can have
multiple 'device_type' clauses. I believe there is no supporting prose
for this limitation.
- [ ] SEE change for num_gangs/etc above.


Changes that need discussion/research:
IanWood1 pushed a commit to IanWood1/llvm-project that referenced this pull request May 6, 2025
llvm#135372)

…uses

The Flang implemenation of OpenACC uses a .td file in the llvm/Frontend
directory to determine appertainment in 4 categories:

-Required: If this list has items in it, the directive requires at least
1 of these be present.

-AllowedExclusive: Items on this list are all allowed, but only 1 from
the list may be here (That is, they are exclusive of eachother).

-AllowedOnce: Items on this list are all allowed, but may not be
duplicated.

Allowed: Items on this list are allowed. Note th at the actual list of
'allowed' is all 4 of these lists together.

This is a draft patch to swtich Clang over to use those tables. Surgery
to get this to happen in Clang Sema was somewhat reasonable. However,
some gaps in the implementations are obvious, the existing clang
implementation disagrees with the Flang interpretation of it. SO, we're
keeping a task list here based on what gets discovered.

Changes to Clang:
- [x] Switch 'directive-kind' enum conversions to use tablegen See
ff1a7bd
- [x] Switch 'clause-kind' enum conversions to use tablegen See
ff1a7bd
- [x] Investigate 'parse' test differences to see if any new
disagreements arise.
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree as to whether 'collapse' can be multiple
times on a loop. Further research showed no prose to limit this, and the
comment on the clang implementation said "no good reason to allow", so
no standards justification.
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree whether 'num_gangs' can appear >1 on a
compute/combined construct. This ended up being an unjustified
restriction.
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree as to the list of required clauses on a 'set'
construct. My research shows that Clang mistakenly included 'if' in the
list, and that it should be just 'default_async', 'device_num', and
'device_type'.
- [x] Order of 'at least one of' diagnostic has changed. Tests were
updated.
- [x] Ensure we are properly 'de-aliasing' clause names in appertainment
checks?
- [x] What is 'shortloop'? 'shortloop' seems to be an old non-standard
extension that isn't supported by flang, but is parsed for backward
compat reasons. Clang won't parse, but we at least have a spot for it in
the clause list.
- [x] Implemented proposed change for 'routine' gang/worker/vector/seq.
(see issue 539)
- [x] Implement init/shutdown can only have 1 'if' (see issue 540)
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree as to whether 'tile' is permitted more than
once on a 'loop' or combined constructs (Flang prohibits >1). I see no
justification for this in the standard. EDIT: I found a comment in clang
that I did this to make SOMETHING around duplicate checks easier.
Discussion showed we should actually have a better behavior around
'device_type' and duplicates, so I've since implemented that.
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree whether 'gang', 'worker', or 'vector' may
appear on the same construct as a 'seq' on a 'loop' or 'combined'. There
is prose for this in 2022: (a gang, worker, or vector clause may not
appear if a 'seq' clause appears). EDIT: These don't actually disagree,
but aren't in the .td file, so I restored the existing code to do this.
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree on whether 'bind' can appear >1 on a
'routine'. I believe line 3096 (A bind clause may not bind to a routine
name that has a visible bind clause) makes this limitation (Flang
permits >1 bind). we discussed and decided this should have the same
rules as worker/vector/etc, except without the 'exactly 1 of' rule (so
no dupes in individual sections).
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree on whether 'init'/'shutdown' can have
multiple 'device_num' clauses. I believe there is no supporting prose
for this limitation., We decided that `device_num` should only happen
1x.
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree whether 'num_gangs' can appear >1 on a
'kernels' construct. Line 1173 (On a kernels construct, the num_gangs
clause must have a single argument) justifies limiting on a
per-arguement basis, but doesn't do so for multiple num_gangs clauses.
WE decided to do this with the '1-per-device-type' region for num_gangs,
num_workers, and vector_length, see openacc bug here:
https://github.com/OpenACC/openacc-spec/issues/541

Changes to Flang:
- [x] Clang/Flang disgree on whether 'atomic' can take an 'if' clause.
This was added in OpenACC3.3_Next See llvm#135451
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree on whether 'finalize' can be allowed >1 times
on a 'exit_data' construct. see llvm#135415.
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree whether 'if_present' should be allowed >1
times on a 'host_data'/'update' construct. see llvm#135422
- [x] Clang/Flang disagree on whether 'init'/'shutdown' can have
multiple 'device_type' clauses. I believe there is no supporting prose
for this limitation.
- [ ] SEE change for num_gangs/etc above.


Changes that need discussion/research:
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
flang:parser flang:semantics flang Flang issues not falling into any other category openacc
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants