Re: [PATCH 1/4] [GOMP4] [Fortran] OpenACC 1.0+ support in fortran front-end

Hi! On Sun, 16 Mar 2014 20:23:48 +0100, Tobias Burnus wrote: > Can you or Thomas apply the following patch after my patch* has > been committed to the trunk and the branch has been updated? Please > mention PR fortran/60283 in the ChangeLog. > > * http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-03/msg0

Re: [PATCH 1/4] [GOMP4] [Fortran] OpenACC 1.0+ support in fortran front-end

Hi! On Sun, 16 Mar 2014 20:23:48 +0100, Tobias Burnus wrote: > Can you or Thomas apply the following patch after my patch* has > been committed to the trunk and the branch has been updated? Please > mention PR fortran/60283 in the ChangeLog. > > * http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-03/msg0

Re: [PATCH 1/4] [GOMP4] [Fortran] OpenACC 1.0+ support in fortran front-end

Ilmir Usmanov wrote: Committed as r208541. Thanks. Can you or Thomas apply the following patch after my patch* has been committed to the trunk and the branch has been updated? Please mention PR fortran/60283 in the ChangeLog. * http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-03/msg00782.html Tobias

Re: [PATCH 1/4] [GOMP4] [Fortran] OpenACC 1.0+ support in fortran front-end

On 13.03.2014 16:19, Ilmir Usmanov wrote: The following change seems the right thing to do -- but why doesn't the current code trigger a GCC ICE due to a failing subcode check? (At least I thought you had test cases exercising the respective OpenACC vector clauses?) Can you please check that?

Re: [PATCH 1/4] [GOMP4] [Fortran] OpenACC 1.0+ support in fortran front-end

Hi Thomas! On 13.03.2014 15:38, Thomas Schwinge wrote: Hi Ilmir! On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 13:34:54 +0400, Ilmir Usmanov wrote: Committed as r208533. Yay! \o/ Thanks! Yay indeed. And thanks a lot for your comments. The following change seems the right thing to do -- but why doesn't the curre

Re: [PATCH 1/4] [GOMP4] [Fortran] OpenACC 1.0+ support in fortran front-end

Hi Ilmir! On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 13:34:54 +0400, Ilmir Usmanov wrote: > Committed as r208533. Yay! \o/ Three minor things: Please move the entries from gcc/ChangeLog.gomp to the more specific gcc/[...]/ChangeLog.gomp files. Generally, we need to locate and then put ChangeLog snippets into the

Re: [PATCH 1/4] [GOMP4] [Fortran] OpenACC 1.0+ support in fortran front-end

Committed as r208533. -- Ilmir.

Re: [PATCH 1/4] [GOMP4] [Fortran] OpenACC 1.0+ support in fortran front-end

On March 7, 2014 11:45, Ilmir Usmanov wrote: OpenACC 1.0 support to fortran FE -- core. Looks good to me. As Thomas is also fine with the patch set [1], the patch can now go into the branch :-) Previously and still approved are Part 3 and 4 [2] of the series. I will separately reply to Part

Re: [PATCH 1/4] [GOMP4] [Fortran] OpenACC 1.0+ support in fortran front-end

Hi! On Fri, 7 Mar 2014 14:44:25 +0400, Ilmir Usmanov wrote: > Hi Tobias! > > Thanks a lot for your review! Yes, indeed, thanks for working together on improving the patches! > OK for gomp4 branch? For avoidance of doubt, once Tobias is fine with them, these patches are good to go into gomp-4

Re: [PATCH 1/4] [GOMP4] [Fortran] OpenACC 1.0+ support in fortran front-end

Hi Tobias! Thanks a lot for your review! !$acc loop outer_loop: do i = 1, n inner_loop: do j = 1,m ! ... cycle outer_loop exit outer_loop end do inner_loop end do outer_loop That's a new Fortran 2008 feature that CYCLE and EXIT can leave the inner DO loop. I added th

Re: [PATCH 1/4] [GOMP4] [Fortran] OpenACC 1.0+ support in fortran front-end

Ilmir Usmanov: OpenACC 1.0 support to fortran FE -- core. + case OMP_LIST_USE_DEVICE: + if (n->sym->attr.allocatable) + gfc_error ("ALLOCATABLE object '%s' of polymorphic type " + "in %s clause at %L", n->sym->name, name, &code->loc

Re: [PATCH 1/4] [GOMP4] [Fortran] OpenACC 1.0+ support in fortran front-end

Hi Ilmir, thanks for the update. Ilmir Usmanov wrote: I'd use "integer" instead of "INTEGER" as it is not a 'reserved' word OpenMP implementation uses capital letters, so, perhaps, we also should do this, for consistency? Fine with me - I don't feel strong about it. OpenACC 1.0 support to

Re: [PATCH 1/4] [GOMP4] [Fortran] OpenACC 1.0+ support in fortran front-end

Hi Tobias! I fixed my patches. Could you review them? I'd use "integer" instead of "INTEGER" as it is not a 'reserved' word OpenMP implementation uses capital letters, so, perhaps, we also should do this, for consistency? -- Ilmir.