tra added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lib/Driver/ToolChains/Cuda.cpp:206
// -nocudalib hasn't been specified.
- if (LibDeviceMap.empty() && !Args.hasArg(options::OPT_nocudalib))
+ if (CheckLibDevice && LibDeviceMap.empty())
continue;
----------------
I think this may be too strict.
Checking directory structure for the purposes of detecting CUDA SDK should work
well enough to weed out false detection for 'split' CUDA installation and we've
verified libdevice directory presence above.
Checking for libdevice bitcode is somewhat orthogonal to this. IMO, regardless
of how we've found the installation directory, whether we have suitable
libdevice version there should not matter if user explicitly passed -nocudalib.
Insisting on libdevice presence in this situation would be somewhat surprising.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D42642
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
