(towards #2971) move ACC loop trans and OMP parallel loop trans

[victoria-atkinson]

No description provided.

[arporter]

Sorry to crash the party but I've just found a bug in OMPParallelTrans and, since I think you're moving it in this PR, it would be good to fix it. We have:

    def validate(self, node_list, options=None):
        '''
        Perform OpenMP-specific validation checks.

        :param node_list: list of Nodes to put within parallel region.
        :type node_list: list of :py:class:`psyclone.psyir.nodes.Node`
        :param options: a dictionary with options for transformations.
        :type options: Optional[Dict[str, Any]]
        :param bool options["node-type-check"]: this flag controls if the \
                type of the nodes enclosed in the region should be tested \
                to avoid using unsupported nodes inside a region.

        :raises TransformationError: if the target Nodes are already within \
                                     some OMP parallel region.
        '''
        if node_list[0].ancestor(OMPDirective):
            raise TransformationError("Error in OMPParallel transformation:" +
                                      " cannot create an OpenMP PARALLEL " +
                                      "region within another OpenMP region.")

and thus we fall over if the supplied node_list is a single Node. Since RegionTrans (which this class inherits from) permits node_list to be a single Node, this class should too. I think all that is needed is to add:

        node_list = self.get_node_list(node_list)
        if node_list[0].ancestor....

We'd also need to add a new test that calling OMPParallelTrans.validate works OK if provided with just a single Node rather than a list.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 99.96%. Comparing base (0ec7bbb) to head (a273c37).
⚠️ Report is 25 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #3066   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   99.96%   99.96%           
=======================================
  Files         389      391    +2     
  Lines       54620    54629    +9     
=======================================
+ Hits        54601    54610    +9     
  Misses         19       19           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[victoria-atkinson]

@sergisiso @LonelyCat124 @arporter this is ready for review, thank you!

[arporter]

Nice job @victoria-atkinson - thanks :-)
Just some minor tidying up to do.
I'll fire off the integration tests in the meantime.

[victoria-atkinson]

@arporter Thanks for reviewing Andy :) I think it's ready for review again

[arporter]

Thanks Victoria, very nearly there now.
I see the ITs were green - whoop :-)

[arporter]

Hi @victoria-atkinson, if you could fix the linting error and bring this up to master, I'll take another look. Thanks :-)

[arporter]

Thanks Victoria, that all looks good now.
Will proceed to merge.

[arporter]

This is just waiting on #3422 now.

[arporter]

On discussion with @LonelyCat124, this is going to jump #3422 now as that still has a bit to do.

[arporter]

The linkspector failure is the known issue of the LFRic Met Office page and is being dealt with elsewhere.