On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 10:29:21AM -0500, Aaron Watry wrote: > Looks good to me. Is there a piglit test for this?
I just sent a test for this to the list. -Tom > > --Aaron > > On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 7:12 PM, Tom Stellard <[email protected]> wrote: > > From: Tom Stellard <[email protected]> > > > > --- > > src/gallium/state_trackers/clover/llvm/invocation.cpp | 7 +++++++ > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/src/gallium/state_trackers/clover/llvm/invocation.cpp > > b/src/gallium/state_trackers/clover/llvm/invocation.cpp > > index 2d115ed..8ec089d 100644 > > --- a/src/gallium/state_trackers/clover/llvm/invocation.cpp > > +++ b/src/gallium/state_trackers/clover/llvm/invocation.cpp > > @@ -209,6 +209,13 @@ namespace { > > find_kernels(llvm::Module *mod, std::vector<llvm::Function *> &kernels) > > { > > const llvm::NamedMDNode *kernel_node = > > mod->getNamedMetadata("opencl.kernels"); > > + // This means there are no kernels in the program. The spec does not > > + // require that we return an error here, but there will be an error > > if > > + // the user tries to pass this program to a clCreateKernel() call. > > + if (!kernel_node) { > > + return; > > + } > > + > > for (unsigned i = 0; i < kernel_node->getNumOperands(); ++i) { > > kernels.push_back(llvm::dyn_cast<llvm::Function>( > > > > kernel_node->getOperand(i)->getOperand(0))); > > -- > > 1.7.11.4 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mesa-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
