Re: [PATCH v2] openmp, fortran: Add Fortran support for indirect clause on the declare target directive

[Tobias Burnus <tburnus@baylibre.com>]

Hi Kwok,

Kwok Cheung Yeung wrote:
> Oops. I thought exactly the same thing yesterday, but forgot to add 
> the changes to my commit! Here is the updated version.

I regard(ed) this change as obvious - hence, I missed to reply.
But for completeness: LGTM.

I think it would be useful to commit this now with an xfail
for the one failing testcase that depends on the review-pending libgomp
patch.

I mean something like:

--- a/libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.fortran/declare-target-indirect-2.f90
+++ b/libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.fortran/declare-target-indirect-2.f90
@@ -1,2 +1,3 @@
  ! { dg-do run }
+! { dg-xfail-run-if "Requires libgomp bug fix pending review" { offload_device } }

Thanks,

Tobias

> On 06/02/2024 9:03 am, Tobias Burnus wrote:
>> LGTM. I just wonder whether there should be a value test and not just 
>> a does-not-crash-when-called test for the latter testcase, i.e.
>>
>>
>>> +++ b/libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.fortran/declare-target-indirect-3.f90
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
>>> +! { dg-do run }
>>> +
>>> +! Check that indirect calls work on procedures passed in via a 
>>> dummy argument
>>> +
>>> +module m
>>> +contains
>>> +  subroutine bar
>>> +    !$omp declare target enter(bar) indirect
>> e.g. "integer function bar()" ... " bar = 42"
>>> +  end subroutine
>>> +
>>> +  subroutine foo(f)
>>> +    procedure(bar) :: f
>>> +
>>> +    !$omp target
>>> +      call f
>> And then: if (f() /= 42) stop 1
>>> +    !$omp end target
>>> +  end subroutine
>>> +end module
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Tobias
>>