2020-05-12 02:38:53 +08:00
|
|
|
! RUN: %S/test_symbols.sh %s %t %f18 -fopenmp
|
[flang] [OpenMP] OmpVisitor framework for Name Resolution
This is a preliminary framework to do the name resolution for
data references on the OpenMP clauses. Unlike data references
in the OpenMP region, clauses determining the data-sharing or
data-mapping attributes are straightforward and the resolution
process could be extended to do the name resolution in the OpenMP
region. It is hard to determine what kind of checks can be done
in this visitor and what checks should be done later after name
resolution. But the guide line is that `After the completion of
this phase, every Name corresponds to a Symbol with proper OpenMP
attribute(s) determined unless an error occurred.`
1. Take data-sharing clauses as example, create new symbol for
variable that require private access within the OpenMP region.
Declare the entity implicitly if necessary. The new symbol has
`HostAssocDetails`, which is mentioned in the `OpenMP-semantics.md`.
2. For `Shared` or `ThreadPrivate`, no symbol needs to be created.
OpenMP attribute Flag `OmpThreadprivate` needs to be marked for
`Threadprivate` because the `threadprivate` attribute remains the
same whenever these variables are referenced in the program.
`Names` in `Shared` clause need to be resolved to associate the
symbols in the clause enclosing scope (contains the OpenMP directive)
but `OmpShared` does not need to be marked. Declare the entity
implicitly if necessary.
3. For `COMMON block`, when a named common block appears in a list,
it has the same meaning as if every explicit member of the common
block appeared in the list. Also, a common block name specified in
a data-sharing attribute clause must be declared to be a common
block in the same scoping unit in which the data-sharing attribute
clause appears. So, if a named common block appears on a `PRIVATE`
clause, all its members should have new symbols created within the
OpenMP region (scope). For later Semantic checks and CG, a new
symbol is also created for common block name with `HostAssocDetails`.
There are many things are still on the TODO list:
- Better error/warning messages with directive/clause source provenance
- Resolve variables referenced in the OpenMP region, for example,
`private(tt%a)` is not allowed but `tt%a = 1` is allowed in the
OpenMP region and a private version of `tt` maybe created for
the region. The functions created in the `OmpVisitor` should be
able to handle the name resolution on the statement too (more
data structures may be introduced). This is a big portion and may
require some interface changes to distinguish a reference is on
`OpenMP directive/clause` or `statements within OpenMP region`.
- Same data reference appears on multiple data-sharing clauses.
- Take association into consideration for example Pointer association,
`ASSOCIATE` construct, and etc.
- Handle `Array Sections` and `Array or Structure Element`.
- Handle all the name resolution for directives/clauses that have
`parser::Name`.
- More tests
Original-commit: flang-compiler/f18@b2ea520885eceb6e118f690b95e1846183fe378b
2019-09-12 05:42:51 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
! Test clauses that accept list.
|
|
|
|
|
! 2.1 Directive Format
|
|
|
|
|
! A list consists of a comma-separated collection of one or more list items.
|
|
|
|
|
! A list item is a variable, array section or common block name (enclosed in
|
|
|
|
|
! slashes).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
!DEF: /md Module
|
|
|
|
|
module md
|
|
|
|
|
!DEF: /md/myty PUBLIC DerivedType
|
|
|
|
|
type :: myty
|
|
|
|
|
!DEF: /md/myty/a ObjectEntity REAL(4)
|
|
|
|
|
real :: a
|
|
|
|
|
!DEF: /md/myty/b ObjectEntity INTEGER(4)
|
|
|
|
|
integer :: b
|
|
|
|
|
end type myty
|
|
|
|
|
end module md
|
|
|
|
|
!DEF: /mm MainProgram
|
|
|
|
|
program mm
|
|
|
|
|
!REF: /md
|
|
|
|
|
use :: md
|
|
|
|
|
!DEF: /mm/c CommonBlockDetails
|
|
|
|
|
!DEF: /mm/x ObjectEntity REAL(4)
|
|
|
|
|
!DEF: /mm/y ObjectEntity REAL(4)
|
|
|
|
|
common /c/x, y
|
|
|
|
|
!REF: /mm/x
|
|
|
|
|
!REF: /mm/y
|
|
|
|
|
real x, y
|
|
|
|
|
!DEF: /mm/myty Use
|
|
|
|
|
!DEF: /mm/t ObjectEntity TYPE(myty)
|
|
|
|
|
type(myty) :: t
|
|
|
|
|
!DEF: /mm/b ObjectEntity INTEGER(4)
|
|
|
|
|
integer b(10)
|
|
|
|
|
!REF: /mm/t
|
|
|
|
|
!REF: /md/myty/a
|
|
|
|
|
t%a = 3.14
|
|
|
|
|
!REF: /mm/t
|
|
|
|
|
!REF: /md/myty/b
|
|
|
|
|
t%b = 1
|
|
|
|
|
!REF: /mm/b
|
|
|
|
|
b = 2
|
|
|
|
|
!DEF: /mm/a (Implicit) ObjectEntity REAL(4)
|
|
|
|
|
a = 1.0
|
|
|
|
|
!DEF: /mm/c (Implicit) ObjectEntity REAL(4)
|
|
|
|
|
c = 2.0
|
2019-09-17 12:26:40 +08:00
|
|
|
!$omp parallel do private(a,t,/c/) shared(c)
|
[flang] [OpenMP] Predetermined rule for sequential loop index (flang-compiler/f18#976)
This commit implements rule:
A loop iteration variable for a sequential loop in a parallel or
task generating construct is private in the innermost such construct
that encloses the loop.
A Simple example:
```
i = -1 <== Scope 0
j = -1
!$omp parallel <== Scope 1
print *,i,j <-- both are shared (Scope 0)
!$omp parallel <== Scope 2
print *,i,j <-- a) i is shared (Scope 0), j is private (Scope 2)
!$omp do <== Scope 3
do i=1, 10 <-- i is private (Scope 3)
do j=1, 10 <-- b) j is private (Scope 2, not 3!)
enddo
enddo
print *,i,j <-- c) i is shared (Scope 0), j is private (Scope 2)
!$omp end parallel
print *,i,j <-- both are shared (Scope 0)
!$omp end parallel
print *,i,j <-- both are shared (Scope 0)
end
```
Ideally the above rule solves a), b), and c) but a) is left as a TODO
because it is better to handle the data-sharing attribute conflicts
along with the rules for "Predetermined DSA on Clauses".
The basic idea is when visiting the `DoConstruct` node within an OpenMP
construct, if the do-loop is not associated (like `i` loop is associated
with `!$omp do`) AND the do-loop is in the parallel/task generating
construct, resolve the loop index to be private to that innermost construct.
In the above example, `j` loop is not associated (then it is sequential) and
the innermost parallel/task generating construct that encloses the `j` loop
is the `parallel` construct marked with `<== Scope 2`, so `j` is private
to that construct. To do that, I also need to change the prototype of those
`ResolveOmp*` functions to allow specifiying the `scope` because the new
symbol for `j` should be created in Scope 2 and all the `symbol` field of
`Name j` in that `parallel` construct should be fixed, such as c).
Original-commit: flang-compiler/f18@69a845283b058a3644053ec58b00d3361f4d4a59
Reviewed-on: https://github.com/flang-compiler/f18/pull/976
2020-02-19 08:27:43 +08:00
|
|
|
!DEF: /mm/Block1/i (OmpPrivate, OmpPreDetermined) HostAssoc INTEGER(4)
|
[flang] [OpenMP] OmpVisitor framework for Name Resolution
This is a preliminary framework to do the name resolution for
data references on the OpenMP clauses. Unlike data references
in the OpenMP region, clauses determining the data-sharing or
data-mapping attributes are straightforward and the resolution
process could be extended to do the name resolution in the OpenMP
region. It is hard to determine what kind of checks can be done
in this visitor and what checks should be done later after name
resolution. But the guide line is that `After the completion of
this phase, every Name corresponds to a Symbol with proper OpenMP
attribute(s) determined unless an error occurred.`
1. Take data-sharing clauses as example, create new symbol for
variable that require private access within the OpenMP region.
Declare the entity implicitly if necessary. The new symbol has
`HostAssocDetails`, which is mentioned in the `OpenMP-semantics.md`.
2. For `Shared` or `ThreadPrivate`, no symbol needs to be created.
OpenMP attribute Flag `OmpThreadprivate` needs to be marked for
`Threadprivate` because the `threadprivate` attribute remains the
same whenever these variables are referenced in the program.
`Names` in `Shared` clause need to be resolved to associate the
symbols in the clause enclosing scope (contains the OpenMP directive)
but `OmpShared` does not need to be marked. Declare the entity
implicitly if necessary.
3. For `COMMON block`, when a named common block appears in a list,
it has the same meaning as if every explicit member of the common
block appeared in the list. Also, a common block name specified in
a data-sharing attribute clause must be declared to be a common
block in the same scoping unit in which the data-sharing attribute
clause appears. So, if a named common block appears on a `PRIVATE`
clause, all its members should have new symbols created within the
OpenMP region (scope). For later Semantic checks and CG, a new
symbol is also created for common block name with `HostAssocDetails`.
There are many things are still on the TODO list:
- Better error/warning messages with directive/clause source provenance
- Resolve variables referenced in the OpenMP region, for example,
`private(tt%a)` is not allowed but `tt%a = 1` is allowed in the
OpenMP region and a private version of `tt` maybe created for
the region. The functions created in the `OmpVisitor` should be
able to handle the name resolution on the statement too (more
data structures may be introduced). This is a big portion and may
require some interface changes to distinguish a reference is on
`OpenMP directive/clause` or `statements within OpenMP region`.
- Same data reference appears on multiple data-sharing clauses.
- Take association into consideration for example Pointer association,
`ASSOCIATE` construct, and etc.
- Handle `Array Sections` and `Array or Structure Element`.
- Handle all the name resolution for directives/clauses that have
`parser::Name`.
- More tests
Original-commit: flang-compiler/f18@b2ea520885eceb6e118f690b95e1846183fe378b
2019-09-12 05:42:51 +08:00
|
|
|
do i=1,10
|
|
|
|
|
!DEF: /mm/Block1/a (OmpPrivate) HostAssoc REAL(4)
|
|
|
|
|
!REF: /mm/b
|
[flang] [OpenMP] Predetermined rules for loop index variables (flang-compiler/f18#962)
This refers to three rules in OpenMP 4.5 Spec 2.15.1.1:
* The loop iteration variable(s) in the associated do-loop(s) of a do,
parallel do, taskloop, or distribute construct is (are) private.
* The loop iteration variable in the associated do-loop of a simd
construct with just one associated do-loop is linear with a linear-step
that is the increment of the associated do-loop.
* The loop iteration variables in the associated do-loops of a simd
construct with multiple associated do-loops are lastprivate.
A simple example:
```
implicit none
integer :: N = 1024
integer i, j, k
!$omp parallel do collapse(3)
do i=1, N <- i is private
do j=1, N <- j is private
do k=1, N <- k is private
enddo
enddo
enddo
end
```
If `collapse` clause is not present, the associated do-loop for construct
`parallel do` is only `i` loop. With `collapse(n)`, `i`, `j`, and `k` are
all associated do-loops and the loop index variables are private to the
OpenMP construct:
```
implicit none
!DEF: /MainProgram1/n ObjectEntity INTEGER(4)
integer :: n = 1024
!DEF: /MainProgram1/i ObjectEntity INTEGER(4)
!DEF: /MainProgram1/j ObjectEntity INTEGER(4)
!DEF: /MainProgram1/k ObjectEntity INTEGER(4)
integer i, j, k
!$omp parallel do collapse(3)
!DEF: /MainProgram1/Block1/i (OmpPrivate) HostAssoc INTEGER(4)
!REF: /MainProgram1/n
do i=1,n
!DEF: /MainProgram1/Block1/j (OmpPrivate) HostAssoc INTEGER(4)
!REF: /MainProgram1/n
do j=1,n
!DEF: /MainProgram1/Block1/k (OmpPrivate) HostAssoc INTEGER(4)
!REF: /MainProgram1/n
do k=1,n
end do
end do
end do
end program
```
This implementation assumes that the structural checks for do-loops
are done at this point, for example the `n` in `collapse(n)` should
be no more than the number of actual perfectly nested do-loops, etc..
Original-commit: flang-compiler/f18@572a57d3d0d785bb3f2aad9e890ef498c1214309
Reviewed-on: https://github.com/flang-compiler/f18/pull/962
2020-02-06 02:13:43 +08:00
|
|
|
!REF: /mm/Block1/i
|
[flang] [OpenMP] OmpVisitor framework for Name Resolution
This is a preliminary framework to do the name resolution for
data references on the OpenMP clauses. Unlike data references
in the OpenMP region, clauses determining the data-sharing or
data-mapping attributes are straightforward and the resolution
process could be extended to do the name resolution in the OpenMP
region. It is hard to determine what kind of checks can be done
in this visitor and what checks should be done later after name
resolution. But the guide line is that `After the completion of
this phase, every Name corresponds to a Symbol with proper OpenMP
attribute(s) determined unless an error occurred.`
1. Take data-sharing clauses as example, create new symbol for
variable that require private access within the OpenMP region.
Declare the entity implicitly if necessary. The new symbol has
`HostAssocDetails`, which is mentioned in the `OpenMP-semantics.md`.
2. For `Shared` or `ThreadPrivate`, no symbol needs to be created.
OpenMP attribute Flag `OmpThreadprivate` needs to be marked for
`Threadprivate` because the `threadprivate` attribute remains the
same whenever these variables are referenced in the program.
`Names` in `Shared` clause need to be resolved to associate the
symbols in the clause enclosing scope (contains the OpenMP directive)
but `OmpShared` does not need to be marked. Declare the entity
implicitly if necessary.
3. For `COMMON block`, when a named common block appears in a list,
it has the same meaning as if every explicit member of the common
block appeared in the list. Also, a common block name specified in
a data-sharing attribute clause must be declared to be a common
block in the same scoping unit in which the data-sharing attribute
clause appears. So, if a named common block appears on a `PRIVATE`
clause, all its members should have new symbols created within the
OpenMP region (scope). For later Semantic checks and CG, a new
symbol is also created for common block name with `HostAssocDetails`.
There are many things are still on the TODO list:
- Better error/warning messages with directive/clause source provenance
- Resolve variables referenced in the OpenMP region, for example,
`private(tt%a)` is not allowed but `tt%a = 1` is allowed in the
OpenMP region and a private version of `tt` maybe created for
the region. The functions created in the `OmpVisitor` should be
able to handle the name resolution on the statement too (more
data structures may be introduced). This is a big portion and may
require some interface changes to distinguish a reference is on
`OpenMP directive/clause` or `statements within OpenMP region`.
- Same data reference appears on multiple data-sharing clauses.
- Take association into consideration for example Pointer association,
`ASSOCIATE` construct, and etc.
- Handle `Array Sections` and `Array or Structure Element`.
- Handle all the name resolution for directives/clauses that have
`parser::Name`.
- More tests
Original-commit: flang-compiler/f18@b2ea520885eceb6e118f690b95e1846183fe378b
2019-09-12 05:42:51 +08:00
|
|
|
a = a+b(i)
|
|
|
|
|
!DEF: /mm/Block1/t (OmpPrivate) HostAssoc TYPE(myty)
|
|
|
|
|
!REF: /md/myty/a
|
[flang] [OpenMP] Predetermined rules for loop index variables (flang-compiler/f18#962)
This refers to three rules in OpenMP 4.5 Spec 2.15.1.1:
* The loop iteration variable(s) in the associated do-loop(s) of a do,
parallel do, taskloop, or distribute construct is (are) private.
* The loop iteration variable in the associated do-loop of a simd
construct with just one associated do-loop is linear with a linear-step
that is the increment of the associated do-loop.
* The loop iteration variables in the associated do-loops of a simd
construct with multiple associated do-loops are lastprivate.
A simple example:
```
implicit none
integer :: N = 1024
integer i, j, k
!$omp parallel do collapse(3)
do i=1, N <- i is private
do j=1, N <- j is private
do k=1, N <- k is private
enddo
enddo
enddo
end
```
If `collapse` clause is not present, the associated do-loop for construct
`parallel do` is only `i` loop. With `collapse(n)`, `i`, `j`, and `k` are
all associated do-loops and the loop index variables are private to the
OpenMP construct:
```
implicit none
!DEF: /MainProgram1/n ObjectEntity INTEGER(4)
integer :: n = 1024
!DEF: /MainProgram1/i ObjectEntity INTEGER(4)
!DEF: /MainProgram1/j ObjectEntity INTEGER(4)
!DEF: /MainProgram1/k ObjectEntity INTEGER(4)
integer i, j, k
!$omp parallel do collapse(3)
!DEF: /MainProgram1/Block1/i (OmpPrivate) HostAssoc INTEGER(4)
!REF: /MainProgram1/n
do i=1,n
!DEF: /MainProgram1/Block1/j (OmpPrivate) HostAssoc INTEGER(4)
!REF: /MainProgram1/n
do j=1,n
!DEF: /MainProgram1/Block1/k (OmpPrivate) HostAssoc INTEGER(4)
!REF: /MainProgram1/n
do k=1,n
end do
end do
end do
end program
```
This implementation assumes that the structural checks for do-loops
are done at this point, for example the `n` in `collapse(n)` should
be no more than the number of actual perfectly nested do-loops, etc..
Original-commit: flang-compiler/f18@572a57d3d0d785bb3f2aad9e890ef498c1214309
Reviewed-on: https://github.com/flang-compiler/f18/pull/962
2020-02-06 02:13:43 +08:00
|
|
|
!REF: /mm/Block1/i
|
[flang] [OpenMP] OmpVisitor framework for Name Resolution
This is a preliminary framework to do the name resolution for
data references on the OpenMP clauses. Unlike data references
in the OpenMP region, clauses determining the data-sharing or
data-mapping attributes are straightforward and the resolution
process could be extended to do the name resolution in the OpenMP
region. It is hard to determine what kind of checks can be done
in this visitor and what checks should be done later after name
resolution. But the guide line is that `After the completion of
this phase, every Name corresponds to a Symbol with proper OpenMP
attribute(s) determined unless an error occurred.`
1. Take data-sharing clauses as example, create new symbol for
variable that require private access within the OpenMP region.
Declare the entity implicitly if necessary. The new symbol has
`HostAssocDetails`, which is mentioned in the `OpenMP-semantics.md`.
2. For `Shared` or `ThreadPrivate`, no symbol needs to be created.
OpenMP attribute Flag `OmpThreadprivate` needs to be marked for
`Threadprivate` because the `threadprivate` attribute remains the
same whenever these variables are referenced in the program.
`Names` in `Shared` clause need to be resolved to associate the
symbols in the clause enclosing scope (contains the OpenMP directive)
but `OmpShared` does not need to be marked. Declare the entity
implicitly if necessary.
3. For `COMMON block`, when a named common block appears in a list,
it has the same meaning as if every explicit member of the common
block appeared in the list. Also, a common block name specified in
a data-sharing attribute clause must be declared to be a common
block in the same scoping unit in which the data-sharing attribute
clause appears. So, if a named common block appears on a `PRIVATE`
clause, all its members should have new symbols created within the
OpenMP region (scope). For later Semantic checks and CG, a new
symbol is also created for common block name with `HostAssocDetails`.
There are many things are still on the TODO list:
- Better error/warning messages with directive/clause source provenance
- Resolve variables referenced in the OpenMP region, for example,
`private(tt%a)` is not allowed but `tt%a = 1` is allowed in the
OpenMP region and a private version of `tt` maybe created for
the region. The functions created in the `OmpVisitor` should be
able to handle the name resolution on the statement too (more
data structures may be introduced). This is a big portion and may
require some interface changes to distinguish a reference is on
`OpenMP directive/clause` or `statements within OpenMP region`.
- Same data reference appears on multiple data-sharing clauses.
- Take association into consideration for example Pointer association,
`ASSOCIATE` construct, and etc.
- Handle `Array Sections` and `Array or Structure Element`.
- Handle all the name resolution for directives/clauses that have
`parser::Name`.
- More tests
Original-commit: flang-compiler/f18@b2ea520885eceb6e118f690b95e1846183fe378b
2019-09-12 05:42:51 +08:00
|
|
|
t%a = i
|
|
|
|
|
!DEF: /mm/Block1/y (OmpPrivate) HostAssoc REAL(4)
|
|
|
|
|
y = 0.
|
|
|
|
|
!DEF: /mm/Block1/x (OmpPrivate) HostAssoc REAL(4)
|
|
|
|
|
!REF: /mm/Block1/a
|
[flang] [OpenMP] Predetermined rules for loop index variables (flang-compiler/f18#962)
This refers to three rules in OpenMP 4.5 Spec 2.15.1.1:
* The loop iteration variable(s) in the associated do-loop(s) of a do,
parallel do, taskloop, or distribute construct is (are) private.
* The loop iteration variable in the associated do-loop of a simd
construct with just one associated do-loop is linear with a linear-step
that is the increment of the associated do-loop.
* The loop iteration variables in the associated do-loops of a simd
construct with multiple associated do-loops are lastprivate.
A simple example:
```
implicit none
integer :: N = 1024
integer i, j, k
!$omp parallel do collapse(3)
do i=1, N <- i is private
do j=1, N <- j is private
do k=1, N <- k is private
enddo
enddo
enddo
end
```
If `collapse` clause is not present, the associated do-loop for construct
`parallel do` is only `i` loop. With `collapse(n)`, `i`, `j`, and `k` are
all associated do-loops and the loop index variables are private to the
OpenMP construct:
```
implicit none
!DEF: /MainProgram1/n ObjectEntity INTEGER(4)
integer :: n = 1024
!DEF: /MainProgram1/i ObjectEntity INTEGER(4)
!DEF: /MainProgram1/j ObjectEntity INTEGER(4)
!DEF: /MainProgram1/k ObjectEntity INTEGER(4)
integer i, j, k
!$omp parallel do collapse(3)
!DEF: /MainProgram1/Block1/i (OmpPrivate) HostAssoc INTEGER(4)
!REF: /MainProgram1/n
do i=1,n
!DEF: /MainProgram1/Block1/j (OmpPrivate) HostAssoc INTEGER(4)
!REF: /MainProgram1/n
do j=1,n
!DEF: /MainProgram1/Block1/k (OmpPrivate) HostAssoc INTEGER(4)
!REF: /MainProgram1/n
do k=1,n
end do
end do
end do
end program
```
This implementation assumes that the structural checks for do-loops
are done at this point, for example the `n` in `collapse(n)` should
be no more than the number of actual perfectly nested do-loops, etc..
Original-commit: flang-compiler/f18@572a57d3d0d785bb3f2aad9e890ef498c1214309
Reviewed-on: https://github.com/flang-compiler/f18/pull/962
2020-02-06 02:13:43 +08:00
|
|
|
!REF: /mm/Block1/i
|
[flang] [OpenMP] OmpVisitor framework for Name Resolution
This is a preliminary framework to do the name resolution for
data references on the OpenMP clauses. Unlike data references
in the OpenMP region, clauses determining the data-sharing or
data-mapping attributes are straightforward and the resolution
process could be extended to do the name resolution in the OpenMP
region. It is hard to determine what kind of checks can be done
in this visitor and what checks should be done later after name
resolution. But the guide line is that `After the completion of
this phase, every Name corresponds to a Symbol with proper OpenMP
attribute(s) determined unless an error occurred.`
1. Take data-sharing clauses as example, create new symbol for
variable that require private access within the OpenMP region.
Declare the entity implicitly if necessary. The new symbol has
`HostAssocDetails`, which is mentioned in the `OpenMP-semantics.md`.
2. For `Shared` or `ThreadPrivate`, no symbol needs to be created.
OpenMP attribute Flag `OmpThreadprivate` needs to be marked for
`Threadprivate` because the `threadprivate` attribute remains the
same whenever these variables are referenced in the program.
`Names` in `Shared` clause need to be resolved to associate the
symbols in the clause enclosing scope (contains the OpenMP directive)
but `OmpShared` does not need to be marked. Declare the entity
implicitly if necessary.
3. For `COMMON block`, when a named common block appears in a list,
it has the same meaning as if every explicit member of the common
block appeared in the list. Also, a common block name specified in
a data-sharing attribute clause must be declared to be a common
block in the same scoping unit in which the data-sharing attribute
clause appears. So, if a named common block appears on a `PRIVATE`
clause, all its members should have new symbols created within the
OpenMP region (scope). For later Semantic checks and CG, a new
symbol is also created for common block name with `HostAssocDetails`.
There are many things are still on the TODO list:
- Better error/warning messages with directive/clause source provenance
- Resolve variables referenced in the OpenMP region, for example,
`private(tt%a)` is not allowed but `tt%a = 1` is allowed in the
OpenMP region and a private version of `tt` maybe created for
the region. The functions created in the `OmpVisitor` should be
able to handle the name resolution on the statement too (more
data structures may be introduced). This is a big portion and may
require some interface changes to distinguish a reference is on
`OpenMP directive/clause` or `statements within OpenMP region`.
- Same data reference appears on multiple data-sharing clauses.
- Take association into consideration for example Pointer association,
`ASSOCIATE` construct, and etc.
- Handle `Array Sections` and `Array or Structure Element`.
- Handle all the name resolution for directives/clauses that have
`parser::Name`.
- More tests
Original-commit: flang-compiler/f18@b2ea520885eceb6e118f690b95e1846183fe378b
2019-09-12 05:42:51 +08:00
|
|
|
!REF: /mm/Block1/y
|
|
|
|
|
x = a+i+y
|
2019-09-17 12:26:40 +08:00
|
|
|
!REF: /mm/c
|
|
|
|
|
c = 3.0
|
[flang] [OpenMP] OmpVisitor framework for Name Resolution
This is a preliminary framework to do the name resolution for
data references on the OpenMP clauses. Unlike data references
in the OpenMP region, clauses determining the data-sharing or
data-mapping attributes are straightforward and the resolution
process could be extended to do the name resolution in the OpenMP
region. It is hard to determine what kind of checks can be done
in this visitor and what checks should be done later after name
resolution. But the guide line is that `After the completion of
this phase, every Name corresponds to a Symbol with proper OpenMP
attribute(s) determined unless an error occurred.`
1. Take data-sharing clauses as example, create new symbol for
variable that require private access within the OpenMP region.
Declare the entity implicitly if necessary. The new symbol has
`HostAssocDetails`, which is mentioned in the `OpenMP-semantics.md`.
2. For `Shared` or `ThreadPrivate`, no symbol needs to be created.
OpenMP attribute Flag `OmpThreadprivate` needs to be marked for
`Threadprivate` because the `threadprivate` attribute remains the
same whenever these variables are referenced in the program.
`Names` in `Shared` clause need to be resolved to associate the
symbols in the clause enclosing scope (contains the OpenMP directive)
but `OmpShared` does not need to be marked. Declare the entity
implicitly if necessary.
3. For `COMMON block`, when a named common block appears in a list,
it has the same meaning as if every explicit member of the common
block appeared in the list. Also, a common block name specified in
a data-sharing attribute clause must be declared to be a common
block in the same scoping unit in which the data-sharing attribute
clause appears. So, if a named common block appears on a `PRIVATE`
clause, all its members should have new symbols created within the
OpenMP region (scope). For later Semantic checks and CG, a new
symbol is also created for common block name with `HostAssocDetails`.
There are many things are still on the TODO list:
- Better error/warning messages with directive/clause source provenance
- Resolve variables referenced in the OpenMP region, for example,
`private(tt%a)` is not allowed but `tt%a = 1` is allowed in the
OpenMP region and a private version of `tt` maybe created for
the region. The functions created in the `OmpVisitor` should be
able to handle the name resolution on the statement too (more
data structures may be introduced). This is a big portion and may
require some interface changes to distinguish a reference is on
`OpenMP directive/clause` or `statements within OpenMP region`.
- Same data reference appears on multiple data-sharing clauses.
- Take association into consideration for example Pointer association,
`ASSOCIATE` construct, and etc.
- Handle `Array Sections` and `Array or Structure Element`.
- Handle all the name resolution for directives/clauses that have
`parser::Name`.
- More tests
Original-commit: flang-compiler/f18@b2ea520885eceb6e118f690b95e1846183fe378b
2019-09-12 05:42:51 +08:00
|
|
|
end do
|
|
|
|
|
end program
|