jhuber6 added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/test/OpenMP/parallel_for_noinline.cpp:1 +// RUN: %clang -O0 -fopenmp -fno-inline %s -S -emit-llvm -o - | FileCheck %s --check-prefixes=CHECK,CHECK-O0 +// RUN: %clang -O1 -fopenmp -fno-inline %s -S -emit-llvm -o - | FileCheck %s --check-prefixes=CHECK,CHECK-O1 ---------------- igor.kirillov wrote: > jhuber6 wrote: > > This can probably be merged with the other test added in D107649 since it's > > the same problem, just add another run line and run the update script. > It was my first thought too but I don't see how to check this bug with > `#pragma omp parallel if(0)`. If I add function with `#pragma omp parallel > for` there it goes contrary to the test file name > (parallel_**if**_codegen_PR51349). More than that, checks generated by > `update_cc_test_checks.py` are too overwhelming and hide whatever we were > going to test there. I can do it this way or may be you have any other ideas? > > What if I rename my file this test file name to > parallel_**for**_codegen_PR51349.cpp instead? They are related and thus we > don't loose sight of them. Just adding this triggered the bug for me and hardly generates anything. ``` #pragma omp parallel ; ``` Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D112645/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D112645 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
