* [Bug c++/102854] [OpenMP] Bogus "initializer expression refers to iteration variable" when using templates
2021-10-20 9:43 [Bug c++/102854] New: [OpenMP] Bogus "initializer expression refers to iteration variable" when using templates burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-20 11:40 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-21 16:42 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-20 11:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102854
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
For the non-template case (with int / IndexType reversed, (ups!)):
finish_omp_for's vec<tree> *orig_inits is an empty vector
but for the template, it isn't (it contains '0' and 'i'); thus, the following
check is run and fails:
FOR_EACH_VEC_ELT (*orig_inits, i, orig_init)
if (orig_init
&& !c_omp_check_loop_iv_exprs (locus,
The reason is that type_dependent_expression_p (decl) == true in
cp_parser_omp_for_loop_init.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* [Bug c++/102854] [OpenMP] Bogus "initializer expression refers to iteration variable" when using templates
2021-10-20 9:43 [Bug c++/102854] New: [OpenMP] Bogus "initializer expression refers to iteration variable" when using templates burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-20 11:40 ` [Bug c++/102854] " burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-21 16:42 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-27 7:28 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-21 16:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102854
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 51647
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51647&action=edit
gcc12-pr102854-wip.patch
WIP patch. Clearly still more work is needed, apparently pointer iterators
in non-rectangular loops are rejected, like:
void
foo ()
{
int a[1024];
int *p, *q;
#pragma omp parallel for collapse(2)
for (p = &a[0]; p < &a[512]; p++)
for (q = p + 64; q < p + 128; q++)
;
}
and enabling it result in ICEs during omp-expand.c. Furthermore, for both
pointer and random access iterator non-rect loops, I should verify we only
allow the var-outer, var-outer + a2, a2 + var-outer and var-outer - a2 forms
and no others and test code generation.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* [Bug c++/102854] [OpenMP] Bogus "initializer expression refers to iteration variable" when using templates
2021-10-20 9:43 [Bug c++/102854] New: [OpenMP] Bogus "initializer expression refers to iteration variable" when using templates burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-20 11:40 ` [Bug c++/102854] " burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-21 16:42 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-27 7:28 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-14 15:29 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-21 10:34 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-27 7:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102854
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek <jakub@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6b0f35299bd1468ebc13b900a73b7cac6181a2aa
commit r12-4732-g6b0f35299bd1468ebc13b900a73b7cac6181a2aa
Author: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Date: Wed Oct 27 09:16:48 2021 +0200
openmp: Don't reject some valid initializers or conditions of
non-rectangular loops [PR102854]
In C++, if an iterator has or might have (e.g. dependent type) class type
we
remember the original init expressions and check those separately for
presence
of iterators, because for class iterators we turn those into expressions
that
always do contain reference to the current iterator. But this resulted in
rejecting valid non-rectangular loop where the dependent type is later
instantiated
to an integral type.
Non-rectangular loops with class random access iterators remain broken,
that is something
to be fixed incrementally.
2021-10-27 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
PR c++/102854
gcc/c-family/
* c-common.h (c_omp_check_loop_iv_exprs): Add enum tree_code
argument.
* c-omp.c (c_omp_check_loop_iv_r): For trees other than decls,
TREE_VEC, PLUS_EXPR, MINUS_EXPR, MULT_EXPR, POINTER_PLUS_EXPR or
conversions temporarily clear the 3rd bit from d->kind while
walking
subtrees.
(c_omp_check_loop_iv_exprs): Add CODE argument. Or in 4 into
data.kind
if possibly non-rectangular.
gcc/cp/
* semantics.c (handle_omp_for_class_iterator,
finish_omp_for): Adjust c_omp_check_loop_iv_exprs caller.
gcc/testsuite/
* g++.dg/gomp/loop-3.C: Don't expect some errors.
* g++.dg/gomp/loop-7.C: New test.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* [Bug c++/102854] [OpenMP] Bogus "initializer expression refers to iteration variable" when using templates
2021-10-20 9:43 [Bug c++/102854] New: [OpenMP] Bogus "initializer expression refers to iteration variable" when using templates burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2021-10-27 7:28 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-07-14 15:29 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-21 10:34 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-07-14 15:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102854
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The testcase of comment 2 seems to be the same as the one of
bug 106449 comment 4, which went in as
r13-1887-g97d32048c04e97 openmp: Fix up handling of non-rectangular simd loops
with pointer type iterators [PR106449]
A slightly modified variant of that testcase went in follow-up commit
r13-1893-g85fe7e7dd1f146 Add libgomp.c-c++-common/pr106449-2.c
* * *
From the bug comments, it seems as if the following remains:
"Non-rectangular loops with class random access iterators remain broken, that
is something to be fixed incrementally."
* * *
However, given the commit for PR106449 (see above) and the earlier commit
r12-4733-g2084b5f42a4432 openmp: Allow non-rectangular loops with pointer
iterators
(committed right after the commit of comment 3):
I wonder whether the only thing that remains to be done is to add a real C++
testcase for random access iterator non-rect loops - assuming that the pointer
patches cover all what's needed in terms of compiler support.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* [Bug c++/102854] [OpenMP] Bogus "initializer expression refers to iteration variable" when using templates
2021-10-20 9:43 [Bug c++/102854] New: [OpenMP] Bogus "initializer expression refers to iteration variable" when using templates burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2023-07-14 15:29 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-07-21 10:34 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-07-21 10:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102854
Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
--- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Close as FIXED - based on
* my previous comment (comment 4)
* based on the following:
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> WIP patch. Clearly still more work is needed, apparently pointer iterators
> in non-rectangular loops are rejected, like:
(example that is committed as part of PR106449)
> and enabling it result in ICEs during omp-expand.c. Furthermore, for both
> pointer and random access iterator non-rect loops,
I think we cannot really use non-rectangular loops with random-access
iterators.
It works fine as long as the outer and the inner loop access different
variables, an example for this is libgomp.c++/collapse-2.C →
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=blob;f=libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.c++/collapse-2.C;hb=HEAD
But I currently see no way to use in the outer loop
* a C++ iterator
* a range-based for loop
* a C-style index-variable loop
and then to use 'outer' in any way, except of having yet another classic
C-style loop.
Everything else I came up ends up using an expression involving the outer
iteration variable and not the bare variable. But that's rejected ("expression
refers to iteration variable" error).
> I should verify we only
> allow the var-outer, var-outer + a2, a2 + var-outer and var-outer - a2 forms
> and no others and test code generation.
I believe that's what r12-4733-g2084b5f42a4432da8b0625f9c669bf690ec46468 does
in c-c++-common/gomp/loop-9.c →
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=blob;f=gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/gomp/loop-9.c;hb=HEAD
(Admittedly only for "initializer expression" and not for "condition
expression" or "increment expression", but I can confirm that at last the
condition error works.)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread