[Bug c++/126437] New: Re: openmp: Implicitly add 'declare target' directives for dynamic initializers in C++

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=126437

            Bug ID: 126437
           Summary: Re: openmp: Implicitly add 'declare target' directives
                    for dynamic initializers in C++
           Product: gcc
           Version: 17.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Keywords: openmp
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: c++
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org
                CC: burnus at gcc dot gnu.org, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
  Target Milestone: ---

I was (for other reasons) looking into tree dumps of the
'g++.dg/gomp/declare-target-3.C' test case added in commit
r11-6257-g3af02d32cce2ff1ff11d078cf8094305f57ca179 "openmp: Implicitly add
'declare target' directives for dynamic initializers in C++", and I'm confused.

I see the usual (host-side) dynamic initialization:

    void __static_initialization_and_destruction_0 ()
    {
      _1 = foo ();
      a = _1;
      _2 = bar ();
      b = _2;
      _3 = baz ();
      c = _3;
      _4 = qux ();
      e = _4;
      e.0_5 = e;
      _6 = e.0_5 + 1;
      f = _6;
    }

    void _GLOBAL__sub_I__Z3foov ()
    {
      __static_initialization_and_destruction_0 ();
    }

..., but only "Explicitly marked" 'b' appears to get dynamically initialized in
device code, but not the "Implicitly marked" variables that end up in
'.offload_var_table': 'c', 'e', 'f':

    __attribute__((omp declare target nohost, omp declare target))
    void __omp_target_static_init_and_destruction_0 ()
    {
      _1 = __builtin_omp_is_initial_device ();
      if (_1 != 1) goto <D.2800>; else goto <D.2801>;
      <D.2800>:
      _2 = bar ();
      b = _2;
      goto <D.2802>;
      <D.2801>:
      <D.2802>:
    }

    __attribute__((omp declare target nohost, omp declare target))
    void _GLOBAL__off_I__Z3foov ()
    {
      __omp_target_static_init_and_destruction_0 ();
    }

Am I rightfully confused about this, or not understanding this correctly?