From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id A161D3858D3C; Mon, 4 Sep 2023 09:37:58 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org A161D3858D3C DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1693820278; bh=M8Ud9Hj0F94GtM3vdymTLKgWIQZU/Ktc1db3cZOclOc=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=U3WjTKI2vsVFfMDNbySe8eH0a04tPzUpy8DFs/3WPOzppRBm90JsuhpOEpF/cIMdO O/i66nBv21YVtG4xiy06PNUG6BPkND4wcILJ4FfMWF2cD0aLl8J4ZdGK9tDcGgijQN 5z8UKJTemhjMLuPn9TiixtgmdIrnyp2YmURETp2I= From: "tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug middle-end/100059] [OpenMP] wrong code with 'declare target link' and a scalar variable Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2023 09:37:56 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: middle-end X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: openmp, wrong-code X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: burnus at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc see_also Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D100059 Thomas Schwinge changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.o= rg See Also| |https://github.com/MentorEm | |bedded/nvptx-tools/pull/29 --- Comment #6 from Thomas Schwinge --- (In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #4) > https://github.com/MentorEmbedded/nvptx-tools/pull/29 This is now finally incorporated, sorry for the (long...) delay. Are you going to push the GCC-level test case (submitted in this PR), or wa= nt me to? For nvptx offloading, it'll FAIL its execution test until nvptx-too= ls updated, but that's OK in my opinion.=