[SYCL][FPGA] Add support for [[intel::loop_count()]] attribute

[smanna12]

The original implementation of this attribute in
#3438, did not support
the [[intel::loop_count()]] attribute spelling. This patch
adds support for that spelling.

Signed-off-by: Soumi Manna [email protected]

[smanna12]

NOTE: I noticed this missing attribute spelling while working on unifying downstream source codes with pragma support.

[elizabethandrews]

NOTE: I noticed this missing attribute spelling while working on unifying downstream source codes with pragma support

Please verify this spelling and functionality is required for SYCL attribute before merging this. If SYCL backends don't know how to consume this, I am not sure if this required. @premanandrao @zahiraam please take a look

[smanna12]

NOTE: I noticed this missing attribute spelling while working on unifying downstream source codes with pragma support

Please verify this spelling and functionality is required for SYCL attribute before merging this. If SYCL backends don't know how to consume this, I am not sure if this required. @premanandrao @zahiraam please take a look

Tagging @mendell27 / @MrSidims for this question. Should we add this spelling with loop_count attribute?

[premanandrao]

NOTE: I noticed this missing attribute spelling while working on unifying downstream source codes with pragma support

Please verify this spelling and functionality is required for SYCL attribute before merging this. If SYCL backends don't know how to consume this, I am not sure if this required. @premanandrao @zahiraam please take a look

This is implementing
https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/develop/documentation/oneapi-dpcpp-cpp-compiler-dev-guide-and-reference/top/compiler-reference/pragmas/intel-specific-pragma-reference/loop-count.html
is it not, @smanna12?

@elizabethandrews, is this what you wanted verified?

[elizabethandrews]

NOTE: I noticed this missing attribute spelling while working on unifying downstream source codes with pragma support

Please verify this spelling and functionality is required for SYCL attribute before merging this. If SYCL backends don't know how to consume this, I am not sure if this required. @premanandrao @zahiraam please take a look

This is implementing https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/develop/documentation/oneapi-dpcpp-cpp-compiler-dev-guide-and-reference/top/compiler-reference/pragmas/intel-specific-pragma-reference/loop-count.html is it not, @smanna12?

@elizabethandrews, is this what you wanted verified?

I wasn't sure if the solution was to add the loop_count spelling here, or remove the equivalent downstream.

[smanna12]

NOTE: I noticed this missing attribute spelling while working on unifying downstream source codes with pragma support

Please verify this spelling and functionality is required for SYCL attribute before merging this. If SYCL backends don't know how to consume this, I am not sure if this required. @premanandrao @zahiraam please take a look

This is implementing https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/develop/documentation/oneapi-dpcpp-cpp-compiler-dev-guide-and-reference/top/compiler-reference/pragmas/intel-specific-pragma-reference/loop-count.html is it not, @smanna12?
@elizabethandrews, is this what you wanted verified?

I wasn't sure if the solution was to add the loop_count spelling here, or remove the equivalent downstream.

This is implementing
https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/develop/documentation/oneapi-dpcpp-cpp-compiler-dev-guide-and-reference/top/compiler-reference/pragmas/intel-specific-pragma-reference/loop-count.html
is it not, @smanna12?
Yes, pragma syntax support the "loop_count" spelling, so this patch adds the same spelling with loop_count attribute now.

[smanna12]

Thank you for the reviews everyone.