While the spec allows the cache directive at the top of a loop body, the directive has also been utilized at the top of an acc routine. This PR removes the semantic check that rejects the cache directive outside of a loop, allowing orphaned `!$acc cache` similar to CIR. The OpenACC.md deviation document is updated to note this extension.
2.1 KiB
2.1 KiB
OpenACC in Flang
---
local:
---
Intentional deviation from the specification
- The end directive for combined construct can omit the
loopkeyword. - An
!$acc routinewith no parallelism clause is treated as if theseqclause was present. !$acc end loopdoes not trigger a parsing error and is just ignored.- The restriction on
!$acc datarequired clauses is emitted as a portability warning instead of an error as other compiler accepts it. - The
ifclause accepts scalar integer expression in addition to scalar logical expression. !$acc routinedirective can be placed at the top level.!$acc cachedirective accepts scalar variable.!$acc cachedirective is accepted outside of a loop construct.- The
!$acc declaredirective accepts assumed size array arguments fordeviceptrandpresentclauses. - The OpenACC specification disallows a variable appearing multiple times in
clauses of
!$acc declaredirectives for a function, subroutine, program, or module, but it is allowed with a warning when same clause is used. - The OpenACC specification does not prohibit the same variable from appearing
in multiple data clauses, but this is disallowed for variables appearing in
private,firstprivate, orreductionclauses. - The OpenACC specification does not prohibit the same variable from appearing
multiple times in a
use_deviceclause on ahost_dataconstruct, but this is disallowed.
Remarks about incompatibilities with other implementations
- Array element references in the data clauses are equivalent to array sections
consisting of this single element, i.e.
copyin(a(n))is equivalent tocopyin(a(n:n)). Some other implementations have treated it ascopyin(a(:n)), which does not correspond to OpenACC spec – Flang does not support this interpretation of an array element reference.