ye-luo added inline comments.
================ Comment at: openmp/libomptarget/src/omptarget.cpp:233 MapperComponents - .Components[target_data_function == targetDataEnd ? I : E - I - 1]; + .Components[target_data_function == targetDataEnd ? E - I - 1 : I]; MapperArgsBase[I] = C.Base; ---------------- ABataev wrote: > ye-luo wrote: > > ABataev wrote: > > > ABataev wrote: > > > > ye-luo wrote: > > > > > ye-luo wrote: > > > > > > ABataev wrote: > > > > > > > ye-luo wrote: > > > > > > > > ABataev wrote: > > > > > > > > > grokos wrote: > > > > > > > > > > What is the current status of the order of the arguments > > > > > > > > > > clang emits? Is it still necessary to traverse arguments in > > > > > > > > > > reverse order here? > > > > > > > > > Yes, still required > > > > > > > > Based on the conversation in > > > > > > > > https://reviews.llvm.org/D85216 > > > > > > > > This line of code neither before nor after the change plays > > > > > > > > well. > > > > > > > > Shall we fix the order in targetDataEnd first? > > > > > > > This change is part of this patch and cannot be committed > > > > > > > separately. > > > > > > I mean could you fix that issue as a parent of this patch? > > > > > > This change is part of this patch and cannot be committed > > > > > > separately. > > > > > > > > > > If fixing the reordering is part of this patch, I should have seen > > > > > "target_data_function == targetDataEnd ?" branches disappear. > > > > Nope, just with this patch. It reorders the maps and need to change the > > > > cleanup order too. > > > It works just like constructors/destructors: allocate in direct order, > > > deallocate in reversed to correctly handle map order. > > The description says that "present and alloc mappings are processed first > > and then all others." > > Why the order of arguments in targetDataBegin, targetDataEnd and > > targetDataUpdate all get reversed. > Because this is for mappers. Mapper maps are ordered by the compiler in the > direct order (alloc, maps, delete) but when we need to do exit, we need to > release the data in reversed order (deletes, maps, allocs). I was not making the question clear. My question about "reverse" is not about having a reverse order for targetDataBegin. My question was about "reversing" from the the old code. Your change put the opposite order for targetDataBegin, targetDataEnd and targetDataUpdate cases. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D86119/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D86119 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits