tra added inline comments. ================ Comment at: lib/Driver/ToolChains.cpp:4773 @@ +4772,3 @@ + StringRef GpuArch = + DriverArgs.getLastArgValue(options::OPT_march_EQ, "sm_20"); + std::string LibDeviceFile = CudaInstallation.getLibDeviceFile(GpuArch); ---------------- jlebar wrote: > I *think* march is never empty here. We should add it when we create the > CudaActions. > > Same below. > > If I'm right or if I'm wrong, let's make sure there are tests. :) It's guaranteed to be non-empty here only when we're constructing device-side pipeline which *is* normally the case.
Alas, it's possible for user to specify a nonsensical set of arguments that would trigger this assertion: For instance: `clang --cuda-host-only -target nvptx-nvidia-cuda -x cuda` used by test/Preprocessor/cuda-types.cu. Because target is CUDA, we do pick CudaToolchain, but because it's a host compilation, we never get to add -march=sm_XX (TC->TranslateArgs is called with BoundArch=nullptr). Dafaulting to somewhat safe sm_20 on user error seems better than crashing compiler with an assertion. ================ Comment at: test/Driver/cuda-detect.cu:66 @@ -63,2 +65,2 @@ // NOCUDAINC-NOT: "-include" "__clang_cuda_runtime_wrapper.h" // COMMON-SAME: "-x" "cuda" ---------------- jlebar wrote: > Should we test the new sm_XX --> libdevice file mappings added? OK. https://reviews.llvm.org/D23037 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
