On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 08:02:04PM -0600, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> I ran into this bug in the handling of clauses on the combined "masked
> taskloop" OMP directive when I was working on something else. The fix
> turned out to be a 1-liner. OK for trunk?
>
> -Sandra
> commit 17c4fa0bd97c070945004095a06fb7d9e91869e3
> Author: Sandra Loosemore <san...@codesourcery.com>
> Date: Wed Mar 23 18:45:25 2022 -0700
>
> Fortran: Fix clause splitting for OMP masked taskloop directive
>
> This patch fixes an obvious coding goof that caused all clauses for
> the combined OMP masked taskloop directive to be discarded.
>
> gcc/fortran/
> * trans-openmp.cc (gfc_split_omp_clauses): Fix mask for
> EXEC_OMP_MASKED_TASKLOOP.
>
> gcc/testsuite/
> * gfortran.dg/gomp/masked-taskloop.f90: New.
Ok, thanks.
> +! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump "omp taskloop collapse\\(2\\)
> grainsize\\(4\\)" "original" } }
Though perhaps the test should be more flexible and allow both orderings of
the clauses and extra clauses too? So:
! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump "omp taskloop \[^\n\r]*grainsize\\(4\\)"
"original" } }
! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump "omp taskloop \[^\n\r]*collapse\\(2\\)"
"original" } }
?
Jakub
