https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71014
--- Comment #9 from Keith Lindsay <klindsay at ucar dot edu> ---
Harald,
Thanks for your tips on validation/sanitizing tools.
I am not sufficiently fluent in standard-ese to know what 'associated
do-loops(s)" means. It doesn't help that BLOCK and ASSOCIATE appear in other
contexts in the OpenMP standard, making it challenging to locate information
about them in the standard.
If I replace ASSOCIATE with BLOCK/END BLOCK, I do see the same problems.
I added -fdump-tree-original to the gfortran invocation and compiled code with
and without the BLOCK construct. The generated intermediate files have the
difference
@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@
static integer(kind=4) s_true = 5050;
s = {};
- #pragma omp parallel private(i)
+ #pragma omp parallel
{
{
#pragma omp for private(j) nowait
(There are other differences that appear to simply be renaming of labels, I'm
ignoring those.) So it does seem that the presence of the BLOCK construct is
changing how the compiler assigns attributes to the inner loop index. I didn't
think this was correct, but perhaps I'm misunderstanding how the OpenMP and
Fortran standards interact.
At this point, I would like to know if the compiler is in the right in doing
this. If it is, then I would change my coding practice. If it isn't, then I
assume that gfortran developers would want to know about this.
Keith
