Anastasia added inline comments.
================ Comment at: lib/Headers/opencl-c.h:16020 +// The macro CLK_NULL_RESERVE_ID refers to an invalid reservation ID. +#define CLK_NULL_RESERVE_ID (__builtin_astype((void *)0, reserve_id_t)) bool __ovld is_valid_reserve_id(reserve_id_t reserve_id); ---------------- yaxunl wrote: > Anastasia wrote: > > Looks good from my side. > > > > @yaxunl , since you originally committed this. Could you please verify that > > changing from `SIZE_MAX` to `0` would be fine. > > > > Btw, we have a similar definition for `CLK_NULL_EVENT`. > `__PIPE_RESERVE_ID_VALID_BIT` is implementation detail and not part of the > spec. I would suggest to remove it from this header file. > > The spec only requires CLK_NULL_RESERVE_ID to be defined but does not define > its value. Naturally a valid id starts from 0 and increases. I don't see > significant advantage to change CLK_NULL_RESERVE_ID from __SIZE_MAX to 0. > > Is there any reason that this change is needed? I don't see issues to commit things outside of spec as soon as they prefixed properly with "__". But I agree it would be nice to see if it's any useful and what the motivation is for having different implementation. https://reviews.llvm.org/D32896 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
