Re: [PATCH, 4/16] Implement -foffload-alias

[Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>]

On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 12:42:09PM +0100, Tom de Vries wrote:
> --- a/gcc/omp-low.c
> +++ b/gcc/omp-low.c
> @@ -1366,10 +1366,12 @@ build_sender_ref (tree var, omp_context *ctx)
>    return build_sender_ref ((splay_tree_key) var, ctx);
>  }
>  
> -/* Add a new field for VAR inside the structure CTX->SENDER_DECL.  */
> +/* Add a new field for VAR inside the structure CTX->SENDER_DECL.  If
> +   BASE_POINTERS_RESTRICT, declare the field with restrict.  */
>  
>  static void
> -install_var_field (tree var, bool by_ref, int mask, omp_context *ctx)
> +install_var_field_1 (tree var, bool by_ref, int mask, omp_context *ctx,
> +		     bool base_pointers_restrict)

Ugh, why the renaming?  Just use default argument:
		bool base_pointers_restrict = false

> +/* As install_var_field_1, but with base_pointers_restrict == false.  */
> +
> +static void
> +install_var_field (tree var, bool by_ref, int mask, omp_context *ctx)
> +{
> +  install_var_field_1 (var, by_ref, mask, ctx, false);
> +}

And avoid the wrapper.

>  /* Instantiate decls as necessary in CTX to satisfy the data sharing
> -   specified by CLAUSES.  */
> +   specified by CLAUSES.  If BASE_POINTERS_RESTRICT, install var field with
> +   restrict.  */
>  
>  static void
> -scan_sharing_clauses (tree clauses, omp_context *ctx)
> +scan_sharing_clauses_1 (tree clauses, omp_context *ctx,
> +			bool base_pointers_restrict)

Likewise.

Otherwise LGTM, but I'm worried if this isn't related in any way to
PR68640 and might not make things worse.

	Jakub