adurang wrote: > The problem with `ompx_bare` is I think the intention was that it would > create something ABI compatible with other kernel languages. Emitting a > dyn_ptr there would change the ABI.
Then we need to keep the handling for when the kernel environment is not available in #222606. I personally don't mind one way or another tbh as long as we reach a resolution. As I see it we can: 1. Do not touch code generation and handle both host and bare in libomptarget special handling. 2. Ensure a kernel environment is generated always (current). Remove all special handling from libomptarget. 3. Do half here: just generate for host, but not bare. Keep the special handling in libomptarget but don't handle the host there. Which is more amenable to you? https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/223772 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
