Great! Will commit it then! Anastasia
-----Original Message----- From: Pekka Jääskeläinen [mailto:pekka.jaaskelai...@tut.fi] Sent: 12 February 2015 17:25 To: Anastasia Stulova; cfe-commits@cs.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: [Patch][OpenCL] CL2.0 atomic types Hi Anastasia, Yes it does. Thanks! On 02/12/2015 06:49 PM, Anastasia Stulova wrote: > Hi Pekka, > > Updated to include checks for extensions! > > Does it look better now? > > Thanks, > Anastasia > > -----Original Message----- > From: Pekka Jääskeläinen [mailto:pekka.jaaskelai...@tut.fi] > Sent: 14 January 2015 19:13 > To: Anastasia Stulova; cfe-commits@cs.uiuc.edu > Subject: Re: [Patch][OpenCL] CL2.0 atomic types > > Hi Anastasia, > > > I suggest patching first for the non-extension types and later add > support > for the #pragma (and hopefully a check that allows > customizing the support > per target). > > How about this? I'm not sure if it'd nice to expose the atomics if > they are not supported by the target or enabled via the pragma. > > On 01/13/2015 07:57 PM, Anastasia Stulova wrote: >> I just realized this was lost sometime during holidays. :) >> >> @Pekka, I don't have a fix for the extensions for the moment. Would >> it still be ok if I commit this and we look into other bits later? >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Pekka Jääskeläinen [mailto:pekka.jaaskelai...@tut.fi] >> Sent: 15 December 2014 16:42 >> To: Anastasia Stulova; cfe-commits@cs.uiuc.edu >> Subject: Re: [Patch][OpenCL] CL2.0 atomic types >> >> Hi, >> >> Looks good otherwise but (u)long and double atomics should be enabled >> only if the cl_khr_int64_extended_atomics and >> cl_khr_int64_base_atomics are enabled via #pragma, if I read the >> specs correctly. The double atomics additionally require that the >> target > supports double. >> >> Similar applies to the pointer (difference) types (for 64b address >> space, they are supported only if the above extensions are supported). >> >> Related to this is the question whether we should ask from the target >> if the optional extensions should be supported or not, and not enable >> them unconditionally. >> >> I suggest patching first for the non-extension types and later add >> support for the #pragma (and hopefully a check that allows >> customizing the support per target). >> >> On 12/15/2014 05:21 PM, Anastasia Stulova wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> This patch adds CL2.0 atomic types to Clang. >>> >>> Looking forward to your feedback, >>> >>> Anastasia >> >> -- >> Pekka >> >> >> >> > > > -- > --PJ > -- Pekka _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@cs.uiuc.edu http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits