scott.linder added a comment. In D121951#3393928 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D121951#3393928>, @sameerds wrote:
> In D121951#3392470 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D121951#3392470>, @scott.linder > wrote: > >> In D121951#3391472 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D121951#3391472>, @sameerds >> wrote: >> >>> The check for "__ockl_hostcall_internal" is not longer relevant with the >>> new hostcall attribute. Can we simply remove this check? What is the >>> situation where the warning is still useful? >> >> I wasn't aware of the new attribute, I'm happy to just delete it. > > Yeah, it happened in D119216 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D119216>. > > But I am still curious about the check itself. Do we need to worry about a > situation where it is important to check whether OpenCL printf (non-hostcall) > and some other hostcall service are active in the same application? I don't know how important it is to notify the user, but my understanding is pre-code-object-v5 we will use the same kernarg for both the printf and hostcall pointers. I don't know what actually happens (does the runtime notice it can't actually construct the kernarg and fail? does the code just fail when one of the two uses of the kernarg are incorrect?). Should I try to nail down exactly what currently happens? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D121951/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D121951 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
