On 6 March 2015 at 02:31, Sandra Loosemore <sandra@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> On 03/05/2015 04:12 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
>>
>>
>> Ping?
>>
>
> Just commenting on the documentation part:
[]

and a few coding style nits:

+++ b/gcc/c-family/c-pragma.c
@@ -1459,6 +1459,10 @@ init_pragma (void)
     cpp_register_deferred_pragma (parse_in, "GCC", "ivdep",
PRAGMA_IVDEP, false,
                                  false);

+  if (!flag_preprocess_only)
+    cpp_register_deferred_pragma (parse_in, "GCC", "unroll",
PRAGMA_UNROLL, false,
+                                 false);
+

overlong line (also for the IVDEP above)

+++ b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
+static void c_parser_while_statement (c_parser *, bool, unsigned short);
+static void c_parser_do_statement (c_parser *, bool, unsigned short);
+static void c_parser_for_statement (c_parser *, bool, unsigned short);

since we're now a C++ app I would have added a default for the
unsigned short unroll of = 0
Same for
finish_while_stmt_cond, finish_do_stmt, finish_for_cond et al.

In cp_parser_range_for() i take it you remember there is a //TODO
I am attaching an unroll-5.C which might show that this does not seem
to be implemented yet, IIUC

gcc/loop-unroll.c::decide_unrolling()
I'd put the "if (loop->unroll == 1) {continue}" earlier in the
FOR_EACH_LOOP body (we're C++ nowadays) but maybe our optimizers are
good enough to do that anyway (but i fear we're not up to that?).

I did not see c/c++ tests for both !DIR$ UNROLL and !DIR$ IVDEP, fwiw.
You seem to handle both placements proper, though.
cheers,