From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: michelemartone@users.sourceforge.net (Michele Martone)
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 12:21:22 +0200
Subject: [Cocci] [cocci-bug] coccinelle 1.0.6: OpenMP #pragma directive
 leads to function ignore
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1804260925270.2402@hadrien>
References: <20180426081209.GA7703@localhost>
 <alpine.DEB.2.20.1804260925270.2402@hadrien>
Message-ID: <20180426102122.GB7703@localhost>
To: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
List-Id: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr

On 20180426 at 09:25, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Apr 2018, Michele Martone wrote:
> 
> > Dear Prof. Lawall and Coccinelle team,
> >
> > I'm an enthusiastical, however still beginner use of Coccinelle.
> >
> > While running spatch 1.0.6 on a long OpenMP-enabled listing, I
> > noticed that the presence of the C line:
> >  #pragma omp parallel for reduction(+:I) private(I)
> > seems to prevent restructuring of the function containing it.
> > If I simplify the pragma to something like
> >  #pragma omp parallel
> > the problem disappears.
> >
> > Is there anything I can do to restructure large codes containing
> > many of such similar lines ?
> >
> > In the attachment you find a test case and the output I experience.
> 
> Thanks for the report.  We can try to make the parsing of #pragmas more
> flexible.
> 
> julia

Dear Julia,

thanks for the quick response!

I'll be waiting for Coccinelle-sided developments then.

May I ask what would you recommend now to circumvent this ?

>>From the SmPL v1.0.6 Grammar I am not aware of any way to
e.g. ignore pragma lines as they were comments.

So the best what comes to my mind is to:

 - comment #pragma lines
 - compute semantic patch
 - apply   semantic patch
 - uncomment #pragma lines

If there is any better solution, please let me know.

Thanks,
Michele