Jan Vesely jan.ves...@rutgers.edu writes:
On Sun, 2014-10-12 at 01:56 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
[...]
None in this case other than I tend to avoid switch-case statements
instinctively for some reason. But detecting missing cases during
compile time sounds good, I've changed it to a
Jan Vesely jan.ves...@rutgers.edu writes:
On Wed, 2014-10-08 at 18:02 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
Jan Vesely jan.ves...@rutgers.edu writes:
[SNIP]
I also don't like that this way there is no difference between
explicit and implicit kernel arguments. On the other hand it's
On Sat, 2014-10-11 at 12:47 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
Jan Vesely jan.ves...@rutgers.edu writes:
On Wed, 2014-10-08 at 18:02 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
Jan Vesely jan.ves...@rutgers.edu writes:
[SNIP]
I also don't like that this way there is no difference between
Jan Vesely jan.ves...@rutgers.edu writes:
On Sat, 2014-10-11 at 12:47 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
Jan Vesely jan.ves...@rutgers.edu writes:
On Wed, 2014-10-08 at 18:02 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
Jan Vesely jan.ves...@rutgers.edu writes:
[SNIP]
I also don't like that
On Sun, 2014-10-12 at 01:56 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
Jan Vesely jan.ves...@rutgers.edu writes:
On Sat, 2014-10-11 at 12:47 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
Jan Vesely jan.ves...@rutgers.edu writes:
On Wed, 2014-10-08 at 18:02 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
Jan Vesely
On Sun, 2014-10-12 at 01:56 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
Jan Vesely jan.ves...@rutgers.edu writes:
On Sat, 2014-10-11 at 12:47 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
Jan Vesely jan.ves...@rutgers.edu writes:
On Wed, 2014-10-08 at 18:02 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
Jan Vesely
On Wed, 2014-10-08 at 18:02 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
Jan Vesely jan.ves...@rutgers.edu writes:
[SNIP]
I also don't like that this way there is no difference between
explicit and implicit kernel arguments. On the other hand it's simple,
and does not need additional per
Jan Vesely jan.ves...@rutgers.edu writes:
[SNIP]
I also don't like that this way there is no difference between
explicit and implicit kernel arguments. On the other hand it's simple,
and does not need additional per driver code.
Yeah... We definitely want to hide these from the
[SNIP]
I also don't like that this way there is no difference between
explicit and implicit kernel arguments. On the other hand it's simple,
and does not need additional per driver code.
Yeah... We definitely want to hide these from the user, as e.g. the
CL_KERNEL_NUM_ARGS
Jan Vesely jan.ves...@rutgers.edu writes:
On Sat, 2014-08-16 at 13:13 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
Jan Vesely jan.ves...@rutgers.edu writes:
On Thu, 2014-08-07 at 16:02 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
Jan Vesely jan.ves...@rutgers.edu writes:
This respin includes Francisco's approach
On Tue, 2014-09-02 at 15:36 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
Jan Vesely jan.ves...@rutgers.edu writes:
On Sat, 2014-08-16 at 13:13 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
Jan Vesely jan.ves...@rutgers.edu writes:
On Thu, 2014-08-07 at 16:02 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
Jan Vesely
On Sat, 2014-08-16 at 13:13 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
Jan Vesely jan.ves...@rutgers.edu writes:
On Thu, 2014-08-07 at 16:02 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
Jan Vesely jan.ves...@rutgers.edu writes:
This respin includes Francisco's approach of providing implicit
in the arg vector
Jan Vesely jan.ves...@rutgers.edu writes:
On Thu, 2014-08-07 at 16:02 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
Jan Vesely jan.ves...@rutgers.edu writes:
This respin includes Francisco's approach of providing implicit
in the arg vector passed from clover, and Tom's idea of appending
implicit args
Tom Stellard t...@stellard.net writes:
On Thu, Aug 07, 2014 at 04:02:40PM +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
Jan Vesely jan.ves...@rutgers.edu writes:
This respin includes Francisco's approach of providing implicit
in the arg vector passed from clover, and Tom's idea of appending
implicit
On Thu, 2014-08-07 at 16:02 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
Jan Vesely jan.ves...@rutgers.edu writes:
This respin includes Francisco's approach of providing implicit
in the arg vector passed from clover, and Tom's idea of appending
implicit args after the kernel args.
Hmmm... Maybe it
Jan Vesely jan.ves...@rutgers.edu writes:
This respin includes Francisco's approach of providing implicit
in the arg vector passed from clover, and Tom's idea of appending
implicit args after the kernel args.
Hmmm... Maybe it would make sense to add some sort of versioning
(e.g. as part of
On Thu, Aug 07, 2014 at 04:02:40PM +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
Jan Vesely jan.ves...@rutgers.edu writes:
This respin includes Francisco's approach of providing implicit
in the arg vector passed from clover, and Tom's idea of appending
implicit args after the kernel args.
Hmmm...
This respin includes Francisco's approach of providing implicit
in the arg vector passed from clover, and Tom's idea of appending
implicit args after the kernel args.
I assumed it's not safe to modify exec.input, so the input vector is copied
before appending work dim.
Passes get-work-dim piglit
18 matches
Mail list logo
