From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr1-x42a.google.com (mail-wr1-x42a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42a]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2BC24385829E; Fri, 12 Jan 2024 09:53:57 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 2BC24385829E Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 2BC24385829E Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::42a ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1705053240; cv=none; b=ciGW841srPc/F9IeILBFXfdn/dE2Q3lxeOQA7mK5i0m2NJeitYPyydoaAEa0iXyoUivYZ6sn10RT2eeJPSp9nGszN41m5VSCiLHJZ8wUfL9YPm0C6mNEC34rNPPTnBmtOVW0cPVWyKTaC7xNE6sQyWYwdTbTj4ExKc7VKVGAL6o= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1705053240; c=relaxed/simple; bh=tvaeqgb6CkR+ipJex6j8xRsvOCJpPekd8u1esXgNXhg=; h=DKIM-Signature:Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=MGUSGvZQjSa+I1hLla/JqHj1NeZtkaCiIfhUO6552e0i1X7mg8biMSp5YkJih3m0OZvwP8AQW9gOoCp5+kn4qzK7wHUlYBHbE85aSTGVoYi0ZIytGYb3mJi4xZTkFy/nCt1v/SxZZI5EQYCTH7swed0/M3hPyX4kbX8H1sWN3hE= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org Received: by mail-wr1-x42a.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-3375a236525so4808927f8f.0; Fri, 12 Jan 2024 01:53:57 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1705053236; x=1705658036; darn=gcc.gnu.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=UBffdhzBEoqzDaQ/PErV19zBm7P1+TgvzuyYnkqeqIY=; b=ERwEYAyo/KkUkmVv9j3VIm/ClMU1VqM9X7QVEMzgyYxzWy5R7zbzwRX5UW4mK+CQKS VfwU9ERx41Osy9Ps5tlbOOJ01BK9VDj49DNqVkYq6E8YS4TFfKAOoiIzAcU9A10nzq+U IijCI604ezNnX5+rnz4qnJYUFPZv1TLQHVb+JfOs6CYkU66v9HdgpAxL5aGYKgKc+1Me ByxowRQwDrMpQKz01vLbYuhVVjZS02vx9/aB4+/1rAAysIds7YIfAGlUQJgxxz8tvnut 7+kNktsQVxEE1LVU9m/LIQjpuVjz4OHzzr6SOzU25Ocz9+gkjtvv+L8jl0Vjuo3PLsAp 3bNg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1705053236; x=1705658036; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=UBffdhzBEoqzDaQ/PErV19zBm7P1+TgvzuyYnkqeqIY=; b=jz4YjIRQwvd3Xn3XhLA42XG5jtyJC2mIqF67zxEnH2UAozehjuZJLx/pmdZ+UTyJUa 8I9ILVdIlfQZ3kUDCTtiV2p+Pc59ivE1vmK/7jPWSW1eeG2NRoNJUu/ZXX//RtKCTY59 oglzxMM3DOYMhWYeiSfJEpBxeDvQMgF8nMmwmauUX5PryTfLoziBXfHsFKH7NSSVcS6Y 4sDGFhb66tSkDqdVQxbcV2zC2my0pyCXLeWKMgwDi6nlWc1q7RTFMOlefEW7BHUumsUi qbcyb/8pelpHFxMaEMBdlSrTcFeFBeSMB9OXHjU64ez79rMYHcYGYZRI7ywOLbMfAe+W RmKA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzLuPTha1VJZWiKMLmL/3qHOBlQJUYkhqQnEl1dOhhn/iBeUQg4 WFYalHzkzlhH2H2/XYJfkqI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHj4O7uRF4V9Cw4QxlRY3m6OOjnwJIlDonaYeNK9x5kwWzzKRGePx+p2sP7HjyRVjcLIdTr2w== X-Received: by 2002:adf:ec41:0:b0:337:2d65:3002 with SMTP id w1-20020adfec41000000b003372d653002mr538967wrn.4.1705053235596; Fri, 12 Jan 2024 01:53:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from nbbrfq.loc (80-110-214-113.static.upcbusiness.at. [80.110.214.113]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id cw3-20020a056000090300b003367a5b6b69sm3398069wrb.106.2024.01.12.01.53.54 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 12 Jan 2024 01:53:55 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2024 10:44:32 +0100 From: Bernhard Reutner-Fischer To: Harald Anlauf Cc: rep.dot.nop@gmail.com, fortran , gcc-patches Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fortran: annotations for DO CONCURRENT loops [PR113305] Message-ID: <20240112104432.3466b1e9@nbbrfq.loc> In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,GIT_PATCH_0,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Wed, 10 Jan 2024 23:24:22 +0100 Harald Anlauf wrote: > diff --git a/gcc/fortran/gfortran.h b/gcc/fortran/gfortran.h > index 82f388c05f8..88502c1e3f0 100644 > --- a/gcc/fortran/gfortran.h > +++ b/gcc/fortran/gfortran.h > @@ -2926,6 +2926,10 @@ gfc_dt; > typedef struct gfc_forall_iterator > { > gfc_expr *var, *start, *end, *stride; > + unsigned short unroll; > + bool ivdep; > + bool vector; > + bool novector; > struct gfc_forall_iterator *next; > } [] > diff --git a/gcc/fortran/trans-stmt.cc b/gcc/fortran/trans-stmt.cc > index a718dce237f..59a9cf99f9b 100644 > --- a/gcc/fortran/trans-stmt.cc > +++ b/gcc/fortran/trans-stmt.cc > @@ -41,6 +41,10 @@ typedef struct iter_info > tree start; > tree end; > tree step; > + unsigned short unroll; > + bool ivdep; > + bool vector; > + bool novector; > struct iter_info *next; > } Given that we already have in gfortran.h > typedef struct > { > gfc_expr *var, *start, *end, *step; > unsigned short unroll; > bool ivdep; > bool vector; > bool novector; > } > gfc_iterator; would it make sense to break out these loop annotation flags into its own let's say struct gfc_iterator_flags and use pointers to that flags instead? LGTM otherwise. Thanks for the patch!