yxsamliu wrote: Thanks Artem. I think the approach is sound and generally safe to land. Pure host code under -x cuda compiles again, while host-device callers keep the eager resolution they need, and I don't see regressions in the cases I'd worry about.
The main gap is test coverage. The current test only hits method templates with no host/device attributes. Before landing, I'd like a minimal positive case, coverage for the free-function and conversion-operator paths the patch also touches, and a host-device case that fails if the carve-out is removed. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/200662 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
