Re: [openacc] clean up acc directive matching in fortran

Re: [openacc] clean up acc directive matching in fortran

[Cesar Philippidis]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 510 bytes --]

On 06/16/2016 08:30 PM, Cesar Philippidis wrote:
> This patch introduces a match_acc function to the fortran FE. It's
> almost identical to match_omp, but it passes openacc = true to
> gfc_match_omp_clauses. I supposed I could have consolidated those two
> functions, but they are reasonably simple so I left them separate. Maybe
> a follow up patch can consolidate them. I was able to eliminate a lot of
> duplicate code with this function.
> 
> Is this ok for trunk and gcc-6?

And here's the patch.

Cesar


[-- Attachment #2: fortran-cleanup.diff --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 4221 bytes --]

2016-06-16  Cesar Philippidis  <cesar@codesourcery.com>

	gcc/fortran/
	* openmp.c (match_acc): New generic function to parse OpenACC
	directives.
	(gfc_match_oacc_parallel_loop): Use it.
	(gfc_match_oacc_parallel): Likewise.
	(gfc_match_oacc_kernels_loop): Likewise.
	(gfc_match_oacc_kernels): Likewise.
	(gfc_match_oacc_data): Likewise.
	(gfc_match_oacc_host_data): Likewise.
	(gfc_match_oacc_loop): Likewise.
	(gfc_match_oacc_enter_data): Likewise.
	(gfc_match_oacc_exit_data): Likewise.


diff --git a/gcc/fortran/openmp.c b/gcc/fortran/openmp.c
index b780f26..435c709 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/openmp.c
+++ b/gcc/fortran/openmp.c
@@ -1412,63 +1412,101 @@ gfc_match_omp_clauses (gfc_omp_clauses **cp, uint64_t mask,
   (OMP_CLAUSE_GANG | OMP_CLAUSE_WORKER | OMP_CLAUSE_VECTOR | OMP_CLAUSE_SEQ)
 
 
-static match
-match_acc (gfc_exec_op op, uint64_t mask)
+match
+gfc_match_oacc_parallel_loop (void)
 {
   gfc_omp_clauses *c;
-  if (gfc_match_omp_clauses (&c, mask, false, false, true) != MATCH_YES)
+  if (gfc_match_omp_clauses (&c, OACC_PARALLEL_LOOP_CLAUSES, false, false,
+			     true) != MATCH_YES)
     return MATCH_ERROR;
-  new_st.op = op;
+
+  new_st.op = EXEC_OACC_PARALLEL_LOOP;
   new_st.ext.omp_clauses = c;
   return MATCH_YES;
 }
 
-match
-gfc_match_oacc_parallel_loop (void)
-{
-  return match_acc (EXEC_OACC_PARALLEL_LOOP, OACC_PARALLEL_LOOP_CLAUSES);
-}
-
 
 match
 gfc_match_oacc_parallel (void)
 {
-  return match_acc (EXEC_OACC_PARALLEL, OACC_PARALLEL_CLAUSES);
+  gfc_omp_clauses *c;
+  if (gfc_match_omp_clauses (&c, OACC_PARALLEL_CLAUSES, false, false, true)
+      != MATCH_YES)
+    return MATCH_ERROR;
+
+  new_st.op = EXEC_OACC_PARALLEL;
+  new_st.ext.omp_clauses = c;
+  return MATCH_YES;
 }
 
 
 match
 gfc_match_oacc_kernels_loop (void)
 {
-  return match_acc (EXEC_OACC_KERNELS_LOOP, OACC_KERNELS_LOOP_CLAUSES);
+  gfc_omp_clauses *c;
+  if (gfc_match_omp_clauses (&c, OACC_KERNELS_LOOP_CLAUSES, false, false,
+			     true) != MATCH_YES)
+    return MATCH_ERROR;
+
+  new_st.op = EXEC_OACC_KERNELS_LOOP;
+  new_st.ext.omp_clauses = c;
+  return MATCH_YES;
 }
 
 
 match
 gfc_match_oacc_kernels (void)
 {
-  return match_acc (EXEC_OACC_KERNELS, OACC_KERNELS_CLAUSES);
+  gfc_omp_clauses *c;
+  if (gfc_match_omp_clauses (&c, OACC_KERNELS_CLAUSES, false, false, true)
+      != MATCH_YES)
+    return MATCH_ERROR;
+
+  new_st.op = EXEC_OACC_KERNELS;
+  new_st.ext.omp_clauses = c;
+  return MATCH_YES;
 }
 
 
 match
 gfc_match_oacc_data (void)
 {
-  return match_acc (EXEC_OACC_DATA, OACC_DATA_CLAUSES);
+  gfc_omp_clauses *c;
+  if (gfc_match_omp_clauses (&c, OACC_DATA_CLAUSES, false, false, true)
+      != MATCH_YES)
+    return MATCH_ERROR;
+
+  new_st.op = EXEC_OACC_DATA;
+  new_st.ext.omp_clauses = c;
+  return MATCH_YES;
 }
 
 
 match
 gfc_match_oacc_host_data (void)
 {
-  return match_acc (EXEC_OACC_HOST_DATA, OACC_HOST_DATA_CLAUSES);
+  gfc_omp_clauses *c;
+  if (gfc_match_omp_clauses (&c, OACC_HOST_DATA_CLAUSES, false, false, true)
+      != MATCH_YES)
+    return MATCH_ERROR;
+
+  new_st.op = EXEC_OACC_HOST_DATA;
+  new_st.ext.omp_clauses = c;
+  return MATCH_YES;
 }
 
 
 match
 gfc_match_oacc_loop (void)
 {
-  return match_acc (EXEC_OACC_LOOP, OACC_LOOP_CLAUSES);
+  gfc_omp_clauses *c;
+  if (gfc_match_omp_clauses (&c, OACC_LOOP_CLAUSES, false, false, true)
+      != MATCH_YES)
+    return MATCH_ERROR;
+
+  new_st.op = EXEC_OACC_LOOP;
+  new_st.ext.omp_clauses = c;
+  return MATCH_YES;
 }
 
 
@@ -1580,14 +1618,28 @@ gfc_match_oacc_update (void)
 match
 gfc_match_oacc_enter_data (void)
 {
-  return match_acc (EXEC_OACC_ENTER_DATA, OACC_ENTER_DATA_CLAUSES);
+  gfc_omp_clauses *c;
+  if (gfc_match_omp_clauses (&c, OACC_ENTER_DATA_CLAUSES, false, false, true)
+      != MATCH_YES)
+    return MATCH_ERROR;
+
+  new_st.op = EXEC_OACC_ENTER_DATA;
+  new_st.ext.omp_clauses = c;
+  return MATCH_YES;
 }
 
 
 match
 gfc_match_oacc_exit_data (void)
 {
-  return match_acc (EXEC_OACC_EXIT_DATA, OACC_EXIT_DATA_CLAUSES);
+  gfc_omp_clauses *c;
+  if (gfc_match_omp_clauses (&c, OACC_EXIT_DATA_CLAUSES, false, false, true)
+      != MATCH_YES)
+    return MATCH_ERROR;
+
+  new_st.op = EXEC_OACC_EXIT_DATA;
+  new_st.ext.omp_clauses = c;
+  return MATCH_YES;
 }
 
 

[openacc] clean up acc directive matching in fortran

[Cesar Philippidis]

This patch introduces a match_acc function to the fortran FE. It's
almost identical to match_omp, but it passes openacc = true to
gfc_match_omp_clauses. I supposed I could have consolidated those two
functions, but they are reasonably simple so I left them separate. Maybe
a follow up patch can consolidate them. I was able to eliminate a lot of
duplicate code with this function.

Is this ok for trunk and gcc-6?

Cesar

Re: [openacc] clean up acc directive matching in fortran

[Tobias Burnus]

Cesar Philippidis wrote:
> On 06/16/2016 08:30 PM, Cesar Philippidis wrote:
> > This patch introduces a match_acc function to the fortran FE. It's
> > almost identical to match_omp, but it passes openacc = true to
> > gfc_match_omp_clauses. I supposed I could have consolidated those two
> > functions, but they are reasonably simple so I left them separate. Maybe
> > a follow up patch can consolidate them. I was able to eliminate a lot of
> > duplicate code with this function.
> > 
> > Is this ok for trunk and gcc-6?

> And here's the patch.

The patch seems to be reverse. If I regard the "-" lines as additions
and the "+" lines as deletions, it makes sense and is in line with
the ChangeLog and what you wrote above.

Otherwise, it looks good to me.

Tobias

Re: [openacc] clean up acc directive matching in fortran

[Jakub Jelinek]

On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 10:40:40AM +0200, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> Cesar Philippidis wrote:
> > On 06/16/2016 08:30 PM, Cesar Philippidis wrote:
> > > This patch introduces a match_acc function to the fortran FE. It's
> > > almost identical to match_omp, but it passes openacc = true to
> > > gfc_match_omp_clauses. I supposed I could have consolidated those two
> > > functions, but they are reasonably simple so I left them separate. Maybe
> > > a follow up patch can consolidate them. I was able to eliminate a lot of
> > > duplicate code with this function.
> > > 
> > > Is this ok for trunk and gcc-6?
> 
> > And here's the patch.
> 
> The patch seems to be reverse. If I regard the "-" lines as additions
> and the "+" lines as deletions, it makes sense and is in line with
> the ChangeLog and what you wrote above.
> 
> Otherwise, it looks good to me.

Yeah, patch -R + commit is ok with me.

	Jakub