On Thu, 2016-12-08 at 11:47 -0800, Matt Arsenault wrote: > > On Dec 7, 2016, at 11:03, Jan Vesely <jan.ves...@rutgers.edu> wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2016-12-06 at 11:05 -0800, Matt Arsenault wrote: > > > > On Dec 6, 2016, at 11:04, Jan Vesely <jan.ves...@rutgers.edu> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, 2016-12-06 at 10:52 -0800, Matt Arsenault wrote: > > > > > > On Dec 5, 2016, at 12:42, Jan Vesely <jan.ves...@rutgers.edu> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 2016-12-05 at 09:48 -0800, arse...@gmail.com > > > > > > <mailto:arse...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > From: Matt Arsenault <arse...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > .../execute/negative-private-base-pointer.cl | 120 > > > > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > > > > 1 file changed, 120 insertions(+) > > > > > > > create mode 100644 > > > > > > > tests/cl/program/execute/negative-private-base-pointer.cl > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git > > > > > > > a/tests/cl/program/execute/negative-private-base-pointer.cl > > > > > > > b/tests/cl/program/execute/negative-private-base-pointer.cl > > > > > > > new file mode 100644 > > > > > > > index 0000000..7ee528b > > > > > > > --- /dev/null > > > > > > > +++ b/tests/cl/program/execute/negative-private-base-pointer.cl > > > > > > > @@ -0,0 +1,120 @@ > > > > > > > +/*! > > > > > > > +[config] > > > > > > > +name: negative private buffer base index > > > > > > > +clc_version_min: 10 > > > > > > > +dimensions: 1 > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > +[test] > > > > > > > +kernel_name: read_write_private_base_plus_offset > > > > > > > +name: negative base private index > > > > > > > +global_size: 1 0 0 > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > +arg_out: 0 buffer int[16] \ > > > > > > > + 0xab \ > > > > > > > + 0xbc \ > > > > > > > + 0xabcd \ > > > > > > > + 0xdead \ > > > > > > > + \ > > > > > > > + 0xcafe \ > > > > > > > + 0xf00d \ > > > > > > > + 0xababfeed \ > > > > > > > + 0xca00fe \ > > > > > > > + \ > > > > > > > + 0xb00feed \ > > > > > > > + 0xca00fe \ > > > > > > > + 0xfeedbeef \ > > > > > > > + 0xfe \ > > > > > > > + \ > > > > > > > + 0xbe00fe \ > > > > > > > + 0xabcdef \ > > > > > > > + 0xbeef \ > > > > > > > + 0xde > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > +arg_in: 1 buffer int[16] \ > > > > > > > + -1 \ > > > > > > > + -1 \ > > > > > > > + -4 \ > > > > > > > + -4 \ > > > > > > > + \ > > > > > > > + -3 \ > > > > > > > + -4 \ > > > > > > > + -2 \ > > > > > > > + -115 \ > > > > > > > + \ > > > > > > > + -109 \ > > > > > > > + -1015 \ > > > > > > > + -1011 \ > > > > > > > + -1020 \ > > > > > > > + \ > > > > > > > + -1014 \ > > > > > > > + -137 \ > > > > > > > + -151 \ > > > > > > > + -40 > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > +!*/ > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > +#if 0 > > > > > > > + 0xab \ > > > > > > > + 0xbc \ > > > > > > > + 0xf00d \ > > > > > > > + 0xdead \ > > > > > > > + 0xcafe \ > > > > > > > + 0xabcd \ > > > > > > > + 0xababfeed \ > > > > > > > + 0xca00fe \ > > > > > > > + 0xb00feed \ > > > > > > > + 0xca00fe \ > > > > > > > + 0xfeedbeef \ > > > > > > > + 0xfe \ > > > > > > > + 0xbe00fe \ > > > > > > > + 0xabcdef \ > > > > > > > + 0xbeef \ > > > > > > > + 0xde > > > > > > > +#endif > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > +kernel void read_write_private_base_plus_offset(global int* out, > > > > > > > global int* in) > > > > > > > +{ > > > > > > > + volatile int alloca[16]; > > > > > > > > > > > > does this need to be volatile? > > > > > > > > > > > > other than that: > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Jan Vesely <jan.ves...@rutgers.edu > > > > > > <mailto:jan.ves...@rutgers.edu>> > > > > > > > > > > > > Jan > > > > > > > > > > Yes, otherwise the private memory access will be trivially optimized > > > > > out defeating the point of the test > > > > > > > > I don't get the trivial part. what would that be optimized to? the > > > > indices are using values from input buffer (therefore unknown), so it > > > > cannot directly match the constants to corresponding position in out > > > > buffer. > > > > > > > > Jan > > > > > > This could be replaced with a series of selects or hit the move to LDS > > > optimization > > > > right, thanks. I didn't consider move to LDS. > > > > last question. what's the purpose of that #if 0 block? > > > > Jan > > > I think it was just other values I was going to test but then never finished > them
can I drop the part? Jan
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Piglit mailing list Piglit@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit
