[Frontend][OpenMP] Apply ompx_attribute to all allowing leaf constructs

[kparzysz]

By default, in a compound directive, a clause will apply to the unique leaf construct that allows it. Clauses that could apply to multiple leaf constructs follow different rules.

For ompx_attribute, apply it to all leaf constructs that allow it.

[llvmbot]

@llvm/pr-subscribers-flang-openmp

Author: Krzysztof Parzyszek (kparzysz)

Changes

By default, in a compound directive, a clause will apply to the unique leaf construct that allows it. Clauses that could apply to multiple leaf constructs follow different rules.

For ompx_attribute, apply it to all leaf constructs that allow it.

---

Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100370.diff

1 Files Affected:

• (modified) llvm/include/llvm/Frontend/OpenMP/ConstructDecompositionT.h (+10)

diff --git a/llvm/include/llvm/Frontend/OpenMP/ConstructDecompositionT.h b/llvm/include/llvm/Frontend/OpenMP/ConstructDecompositionT.h
index 3feb4bd11c998..349d862135d8c 100644
--- a/llvm/include/llvm/Frontend/OpenMP/ConstructDecompositionT.h
+++ b/llvm/include/llvm/Frontend/OpenMP/ConstructDecompositionT.h
@@ -236,6 +236,9 @@ struct ConstructDecompositionT {
                    const ClauseTy *);
   bool applyClause(const tomp::clause::NowaitT<TypeTy, IdTy, ExprTy> &clause,
                    const ClauseTy *);
+  bool
+  applyClause(const tomp::clause::OmpxAttributeT<TypeTy, IdTy, ExprTy> &clause,
+              const ClauseTy *);
 
   uint32_t version;
   llvm::omp::Directive construct;
@@ -1101,6 +1104,13 @@ bool ConstructDecompositionT<C, H>::applyClause(
   return applyToOutermost(node);
 }
 
+template <typename C, typename H>
+bool ConstructDecompositionT<C, H>::applyClause(
+    const tomp::clause::OmpxAttributeT<TypeTy, IdTy, ExprTy> &clause,
+    const ClauseTy *node) {
+  return applyToAll(node);
+}
+
 template <typename C, typename H> bool ConstructDecompositionT<C, H>::split() {
   bool success = true;
 

[kparzysz]

@jdoerfert, you added code for this clause. Does this PR reflect the correct behavior when ompx_attribute is present on a compound construct?

[jdoerfert]

Likely this is the best option. In practice, we used it so far only to attach it to the outermost directive (target) but it should never be a bad idea to attach it to all.