Re: [PATCH] D20447: [OpenCL] Fixup extension list
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. jvesely marked 5 inline comments as done. Closed by commit rL271413: Fixup list of available extensions (authored by jvesely). Changed prior to commit: http://reviews.llvm.org/D20447?vs=59240=59254#toc Repository: rL LLVM http://reviews.llvm.org/D20447 Files: cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/OpenCLExtensions.def cfe/trunk/test/SemaOpenCL/extension-version.cl Index: cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/OpenCLExtensions.def === --- cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/OpenCLExtensions.def +++ cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/OpenCLExtensions.def @@ -34,35 +34,39 @@ #endif // OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL // OpenCL 1.0. -OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_3d_image_writes, 100, 120) +OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_3d_image_writes, 100, 200) +// fprounding mode is special since it is not mentioned beyond 1.0 +OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_select_fprounding_mode, 100, 110) OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_byte_addressable_store, 100, 110) OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_fp16, 100, ~0U) OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_fp64, 100, 120) OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_global_int32_base_atomics, 100, 110) OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_global_int32_extended_atomics, 100, 110) -OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_gl_sharing, 100, ~0U) -OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_icd, 100, ~0U) OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_local_int32_base_atomics, 100, 110) OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_local_int32_extended_atomics, 100, 110) +OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_int64_base_atomics, 100, ~0U) +OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_int64_extended_atomics, 100, ~0U) +OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_gl_sharing, 100, ~0U) +OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_icd, 100, ~0U) // OpenCL 1.1. -OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_d3d10_sharing, 110, ~0U) OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_gl_event, 110, ~0U) -OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_int64_base_atomics, 110, ~0U) -OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_int64_extended_atomics, 110, ~0U) +OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_d3d10_sharing, 110, ~0U) // OpenCL 1.2. +OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_context_abort, 120, ~0U) OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_d3d11_sharing, 120, ~0U) OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_depth_images, 120, ~0U) OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_dx9_media_sharing, 120, ~0U) +OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_image2d_from_buffer, 120, ~0U) +OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_initialize_memory, 120, ~0U) OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_gl_depth_images, 120, ~0U) +OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_gl_msaa_sharing, 120, ~0U) OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_spir, 120, ~0U) // OpenCL 2.0. OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_egl_event, 200, ~0U) OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_egl_image, 200, ~0U) -OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_gl_msaa_sharing, 200, ~0U) -OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_initialize_memory, 200, ~0U) OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_srgb_image_writes, 200, ~0U) OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_subgroups, 200, ~0U) OPENCLEXT_INTERNAL(cl_khr_terminate_context, 200, ~0U) Index: cfe/trunk/test/SemaOpenCL/extension-version.cl === --- cfe/trunk/test/SemaOpenCL/extension-version.cl +++ cfe/trunk/test/SemaOpenCL/extension-version.cl @@ -0,0 +1,225 @@ +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -x cl -cl-std=CL %s -verify -triple spir-unknown-unknown +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -x cl -cl-std=CL1.1 %s -verify -triple spir-unknown-unknown +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -x cl -cl-std=CL1.2 %s -verify -triple spir-unknown-unknown +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -x cl -cl-std=CL2.0 %s -verify -triple spir-unknown-unknown + +#if __OPENCL_C_VERSION__ >= 200 +// expected-no-diagnostics +#endif + +// Extensions in all versions +#ifndef cl_clang_storage_class_specifiers +#error "Missing cl_clang_storage_class_specifiers define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_clang_storage_class_specifiers: enable + +#ifndef cl_khr_fp16 +#error "Missing cl_khr_fp16 define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_fp16: enable + +#ifndef cl_khr_int64_base_atomics +#error "Missing cl_khr_int64_base_atomics define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_int64_base_atomics: enable + +#ifndef cl_khr_int64_extended_atomics +#error "Missing cl_khr_int64_extended_atomics define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_int64_extended_atomics: enable + +#ifndef cl_khr_gl_sharing +#error "Missing cl_khr_gl_sharing define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_gl_sharing: enable + +#ifndef cl_khr_icd +#error "Missing cl_khr_icd define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_icd: enable + +// Core features in CL 1.1 +#if (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ < 110) +#ifndef cl_khr_byte_addressable_store +#error "Missing cl_khr_byte_addressable_store define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_byte_addressable_store: enable + +#ifndef cl_khr_global_int32_base_atomics +#error "Missing cl_khr_global_int32_base_atomics define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_global_int32_base_atomics: enable + +#ifndef cl_khr_global_int32_extended_atomics +#error "Missing cl_khr_global_int32_extended_atomics define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_global_int32_extended_atomics: enable + +#ifndef
Re: [PATCH] D20447: [OpenCL] Fixup extension list
Anastasia accepted this revision. Anastasia added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. LGTM! Thanks! Repository: rL LLVM http://reviews.llvm.org/D20447 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D20447: [OpenCL] Fixup extension list
jvesely updated this revision to Diff 59240.
jvesely added a comment.
Fix typo: COre -> Core
Repository:
rL LLVM
http://reviews.llvm.org/D20447
Files:
include/clang/Basic/OpenCLExtensions.def
test/SemaOpenCL/extension-version.cl
Index: test/SemaOpenCL/extension-version.cl
===
--- /dev/null
+++ test/SemaOpenCL/extension-version.cl
@@ -0,0 +1,225 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -x cl -cl-std=CL %s -verify -triple spir-unknown-unknown
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -x cl -cl-std=CL1.1 %s -verify -triple spir-unknown-unknown
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -x cl -cl-std=CL1.2 %s -verify -triple spir-unknown-unknown
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -x cl -cl-std=CL2.0 %s -verify -triple spir-unknown-unknown
+
+#if __OPENCL_C_VERSION__ >= 200
+// expected-no-diagnostics
+#endif
+
+// Extensions in all versions
+#ifndef cl_clang_storage_class_specifiers
+#error "Missing cl_clang_storage_class_specifiers define"
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_clang_storage_class_specifiers: enable
+
+#ifndef cl_khr_fp16
+#error "Missing cl_khr_fp16 define"
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_fp16: enable
+
+#ifndef cl_khr_int64_base_atomics
+#error "Missing cl_khr_int64_base_atomics define"
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_int64_base_atomics: enable
+
+#ifndef cl_khr_int64_extended_atomics
+#error "Missing cl_khr_int64_extended_atomics define"
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_int64_extended_atomics: enable
+
+#ifndef cl_khr_gl_sharing
+#error "Missing cl_khr_gl_sharing define"
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_gl_sharing: enable
+
+#ifndef cl_khr_icd
+#error "Missing cl_khr_icd define"
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_icd: enable
+
+// Core features in CL 1.1
+#if (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ < 110)
+#ifndef cl_khr_byte_addressable_store
+#error "Missing cl_khr_byte_addressable_store define"
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_byte_addressable_store: enable
+
+#ifndef cl_khr_global_int32_base_atomics
+#error "Missing cl_khr_global_int32_base_atomics define"
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_global_int32_base_atomics: enable
+
+#ifndef cl_khr_global_int32_extended_atomics
+#error "Missing cl_khr_global_int32_extended_atomics define"
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_global_int32_extended_atomics: enable
+
+#ifndef cl_khr_local_int32_base_atomics
+#error "Missing cl_khr_local_int32_base_atomics define"
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_local_int32_base_atomics: enable
+
+#ifndef cl_khr_local_int32_extended_atomics
+#error "Missing cl_khr_local_int32_extended_atomics define"
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_local_int32_extended_atomics: enable
+
+#ifndef cl_khr_select_fprounding_mode
+#error "Missing cl_khr_select_fp_rounding_mode define"
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_select_fprounding_mode: enable
+
+#endif
+
+// Core feature in CL 1.2
+#if (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ < 120)
+#ifndef cl_khr_fp64
+#error "Missing cl_khr_fp64 define"
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_fp64: enable
+#endif
+
+//Core feature in CL 2.0
+#if (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ < 200)
+#ifndef cl_khr_3d_image_writes
+#error "Missing cl_khr_3d_image_writes define"
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_3d_image_writes: enable
+#endif
+
+
+#if (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ >= 110)
+#ifndef cl_khr_gl_event
+#error "Missing cl_khr_gl_event define"
+#endif
+#else
+// expected-warning@+2{{unsupported OpenCL extension 'cl_khr_gl_event' - ignoring}}
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_gl_event: enable
+
+#if (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ >= 110)
+#ifndef cl_khr_d3d10_sharing
+#error "Missing cl_khr_d3d10_sharing define"
+#endif
+#else
+// expected-warning@+2{{unsupported OpenCL extension 'cl_khr_d3d10_sharing' - ignoring}}
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_d3d10_sharing: enable
+
+#if (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ >= 120)
+#ifndef cl_khr_context_abort
+#error "Missing cl_context_abort define"
+#endif
+#else
+// expected-warning@+2{{unsupported OpenCL extension 'cl_khr_context_abort' - ignoring}}
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_context_abort: enable
+
+#if (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ >= 120)
+#ifndef cl_khr_d3d11_sharing
+#error "Missing cl_khr_d3d11_sharing define"
+#endif
+#else
+// expected-warning@+2{{unsupported OpenCL extension 'cl_khr_d3d11_sharing' - ignoring}}
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_d3d11_sharing: enable
+
+#if (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ >= 120)
+#ifndef cl_khr_dx9_media_sharing
+#error "Missing cl_khr_dx9_media_sharing define"
+#endif
+#else
+// expected-warning@+2{{unsupported OpenCL extension 'cl_khr_dx9_media_sharing' - ignoring}}
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_dx9_media_sharing: enable
+
+#if (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ >= 120)
+#ifndef cl_khr_image2d_from_buffer
+#error "Missing cl_khr_image2d_from_buffer define"
+#endif
+#else
+// expected-warning@+2{{unsupported OpenCL extension 'cl_khr_image2d_from_buffer' - ignoring}}
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_image2d_from_buffer: enable
+
+#if (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ >= 120)
+#ifndef
Re: [PATCH] D20447: [OpenCL] Fixup extension list
Anastasia added inline comments. Comment at: test/SemaOpenCL/extension-version.cl:73 @@ +72,3 @@ + +#endif + jvesely wrote: > Anastasia wrote: > > Could you put a comment to make it more readable, something like > > > > #endif // (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ < 110) > These large blocks get broken into ~7 line pieces, in D20744. Do you still > want the endif comments there, or should I add the comments here and remove > them in D20744? Ok, no problem. Let's just leave it as is. I guess the other change will be committed soon. :) Repository: rL LLVM http://reviews.llvm.org/D20447 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D20447: [OpenCL] Fixup extension list
jvesely marked 2 inline comments as done. Comment at: test/SemaOpenCL/extension-version.cl:73 @@ +72,3 @@ + +#endif + Anastasia wrote: > Could you put a comment to make it more readable, something like > > #endif // (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ < 110) These large blocks get broken into ~7 line pieces, in D20744. Do you still want the endif comments there, or should I add the comments here and remove them in D20744? Repository: rL LLVM http://reviews.llvm.org/D20447 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D20447: [OpenCL] Fixup extension list
Anastasia added inline comments. Comment at: test/SemaOpenCL/extension-version.cl:41 @@ +40,3 @@ + +// COre features in CL 1.1 +#if (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ < 110) COre -> core Comment at: test/SemaOpenCL/extension-version.cl:73 @@ +72,3 @@ + +#endif + Could you put a comment to make it more readable, something like #endif // (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ < 110) Repository: rL LLVM http://reviews.llvm.org/D20447 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D20447: [OpenCL] Fixup extension list
Anastasia added inline comments. Comment at: test/SemaOpenCL/extension-version.cl:41 @@ +40,3 @@ + +// COre features in CL 1.1 +#if (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ < 110) Anastasia wrote: > COre -> core Actually looking at other comments -> Core Repository: rL LLVM http://reviews.llvm.org/D20447 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D20447: [OpenCL] Fixup extension list
jvesely marked 7 inline comments as done. Comment at: test/SemaOpenCL/extension-version.cl:12 @@ +11,3 @@ +#ifndef cl_clang_storage_class_specifiers +#error "Missing cl_clang_storage_class_specifiers define" +#endif arsenm wrote: > When the AMD compiler added these warnings a long time ago I found them > obnoxious and required adding more complicated ifdef combinations to silence > them moved to D20744 Repository: rL LLVM http://reviews.llvm.org/D20447 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D20447: [OpenCL] Fixup extension list
arsenm added a subscriber: arsenm. Comment at: test/SemaOpenCL/extension-version.cl:12 @@ +11,3 @@ +#ifndef cl_clang_storage_class_specifiers +#error "Missing cl_clang_storage_class_specifiers define" +#endif When the AMD compiler added these warnings a long time ago I found them obnoxious and required adding more complicated ifdef combinations to silence them Repository: rL LLVM http://reviews.llvm.org/D20447 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D20447: [OpenCL] Fixup extension list
jvesely updated this revision to Diff 58806.
jvesely added a comment.
add detection of extensions in early CL versions to test.
Repository:
rL LLVM
http://reviews.llvm.org/D20447
Files:
include/clang/Basic/OpenCLExtensions.def
test/SemaOpenCL/extension-version.cl
Index: test/SemaOpenCL/extension-version.cl
===
--- /dev/null
+++ test/SemaOpenCL/extension-version.cl
@@ -0,0 +1,225 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -x cl -cl-std=CL %s -verify -triple spir-unknown-unknown
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -x cl -cl-std=CL1.1 %s -verify -triple spir-unknown-unknown
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -x cl -cl-std=CL1.2 %s -verify -triple spir-unknown-unknown
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -x cl -cl-std=CL2.0 %s -verify -triple spir-unknown-unknown
+
+#if __OPENCL_C_VERSION__ >= 200
+// expected-no-diagnostics
+#endif
+
+// Extensions in all versions
+#ifndef cl_clang_storage_class_specifiers
+#error "Missing cl_clang_storage_class_specifiers define"
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_clang_storage_class_specifiers: enable
+
+#ifndef cl_khr_fp16
+#error "Missing cl_khr_fp16 define"
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_fp16: enable
+
+#ifndef cl_khr_int64_base_atomics
+#error "Missing cl_khr_int64_base_atomics define"
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_int64_base_atomics: enable
+
+#ifndef cl_khr_int64_extended_atomics
+#error "Missing cl_khr_int64_extended_atomics define"
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_int64_extended_atomics: enable
+
+#ifndef cl_khr_gl_sharing
+#error "Missing cl_khr_gl_sharing define"
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_gl_sharing: enable
+
+#ifndef cl_khr_icd
+#error "Missing cl_khr_icd define"
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_icd: enable
+
+// COre features in CL 1.1
+#if (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ < 110)
+#ifndef cl_khr_byte_addressable_store
+#error "Missing cl_khr_byte_addressable_store define"
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_byte_addressable_store: enable
+
+#ifndef cl_khr_global_int32_base_atomics
+#error "Missing cl_khr_global_int32_base_atomics define"
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_global_int32_base_atomics: enable
+
+#ifndef cl_khr_global_int32_extended_atomics
+#error "Missing cl_khr_global_int32_extended_atomics define"
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_global_int32_extended_atomics: enable
+
+#ifndef cl_khr_local_int32_base_atomics
+#error "Missing cl_khr_local_int32_base_atomics define"
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_local_int32_base_atomics: enable
+
+#ifndef cl_khr_local_int32_extended_atomics
+#error "Missing cl_khr_local_int32_extended_atomics define"
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_local_int32_extended_atomics: enable
+
+#ifndef cl_khr_select_fprounding_mode
+#error "Missing cl_khr_select_fp_rounding_mode define"
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_select_fprounding_mode: enable
+
+#endif
+
+// Core feature in CL 1.2
+#if (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ < 120)
+#ifndef cl_khr_fp64
+#error "Missing cl_khr_fp64 define"
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_fp64: enable
+#endif
+
+//Core feature in CL 2.0
+#if (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ < 200)
+#ifndef cl_khr_3d_image_writes
+#error "Missing cl_khr_3d_image_writes define"
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_3d_image_writes: enable
+#endif
+
+
+#if (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ >= 110)
+#ifndef cl_khr_gl_event
+#error "Missing cl_khr_gl_event define"
+#endif
+#else
+// expected-warning@+2{{unsupported OpenCL extension 'cl_khr_gl_event' - ignoring}}
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_gl_event: enable
+
+#if (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ >= 110)
+#ifndef cl_khr_d3d10_sharing
+#error "Missing cl_khr_d3d10_sharing define"
+#endif
+#else
+// expected-warning@+2{{unsupported OpenCL extension 'cl_khr_d3d10_sharing' - ignoring}}
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_d3d10_sharing: enable
+
+#if (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ >= 120)
+#ifndef cl_khr_context_abort
+#error "Missing cl_context_abort define"
+#endif
+#else
+// expected-warning@+2{{unsupported OpenCL extension 'cl_khr_context_abort' - ignoring}}
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_context_abort: enable
+
+#if (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ >= 120)
+#ifndef cl_khr_d3d11_sharing
+#error "Missing cl_khr_d3d11_sharing define"
+#endif
+#else
+// expected-warning@+2{{unsupported OpenCL extension 'cl_khr_d3d11_sharing' - ignoring}}
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_d3d11_sharing: enable
+
+#if (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ >= 120)
+#ifndef cl_khr_dx9_media_sharing
+#error "Missing cl_khr_dx9_media_sharing define"
+#endif
+#else
+// expected-warning@+2{{unsupported OpenCL extension 'cl_khr_dx9_media_sharing' - ignoring}}
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_dx9_media_sharing: enable
+
+#if (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ >= 120)
+#ifndef cl_khr_image2d_from_buffer
+#error "Missing cl_khr_image2d_from_buffer define"
+#endif
+#else
+// expected-warning@+2{{unsupported OpenCL extension 'cl_khr_image2d_from_buffer' - ignoring}}
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_image2d_from_buffer: enable
+
+#if
Re: [PATCH] D20447: [OpenCL] Fixup extension list
yaxunl added inline comments.
Comment at: test/SemaOpenCL/extension-version.cl:11
@@ +10,3 @@
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_clang_storage_class_specifiers: enable
+
Anastasia wrote:
> jvesely wrote:
> > Anastasia wrote:
> > > jvesely wrote:
> > > > Anastasia wrote:
> > > > > Could you use standard diagnostic check please:
> > > > > expected-warning{{unknown OpenCL extension ...
> > > > >
> > > > > Similarly to SemaOpenCL/extensions.cl
> > > > not sure I follow, the test does not trigger any diagnostics (by
> > > > design).
> > > > are you saying that I should introduce negative checks to make sure
> > > > extensions are not available outside of their respective context?
> > > > Is there a way to filter verifier tags based on clang invocation?
> > > > (something like FileCheck prefix)
> > > Exactly, you should check that the extensions are enabled correctly based
> > > on CL versions.
> > >
> > > For example if you compile this without passing -cl-std=CL1.2:
> > > #pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_gl_msaa_sharing: enable
> > > the following error is produced:
> > > unsupported OpenCL extension 'cl_khr_gl_msaa_sharing' - ignoring
> > >
> > > You can condition error directives on CL version passed as it's done in
> > > the example test SemaOpenCL/extensions.cl.
> > >
> > > So what is the original intension of this tests? Not sure I understand
> > > what you are trying to test.
> > it's a positive test that checks that extensions are available (both that
> > the define is present, and that #pragma passes without error).
> >
> > I did not include negative tests (check that extension is not available
> > outside of its respective context), because I think it's a bit overzealous
> > reading of the specs.
> > For example cl_khr_d3d10_sharing is first mentioned in OpenCL 1.1 specs,
> > but the text of the extension says that it is written against OpenCL 1.0.48
> > spec. (I moved cl_khr_icd to 1.0 for the same reason). I think if a vendor
> > can add vendor specific extensions to the list of supported extensions, it
> > should be possible to add extensions from higher CL versions.
> >
> > similarly, I would argue against warnings for extensions promoted to core
> > features (or at least hide the warning behind -pedantic). they are listed
> > in CL_DEVICE_EXTENSIONS for backwards compatibility so I'd say it is OK to
> > allow pragmas in higher CLC versions for backward compatibility.
> I agree with this:
> "similarly, I would argue against warnings for extensions promoted to core
> features (or at least hide the warning behind -pedantic). they are listed in
> CL_DEVICE_EXTENSIONS for backwards compatibility so I'd say it is OK to allow
> pragmas in higher CLC versions for backward compatibility."
>
> @yaxunl, what's your opinion here?
>
> Regarding the test, I think we should still check the diagnostics being given
> correctly especially for the extensions unavailable in the earlier versions.
> It should be quite straight forward to extend this test.
The warning is a reminder that this is no longer an extension and the user
should remove that. However I do not have strong opinion on that.
Repository:
rL LLVM
http://reviews.llvm.org/D20447
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D20447: [OpenCL] Fixup extension list
Anastasia added inline comments.
Comment at: test/SemaOpenCL/extension-version.cl:11
@@ +10,3 @@
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_clang_storage_class_specifiers: enable
+
jvesely wrote:
> Anastasia wrote:
> > jvesely wrote:
> > > Anastasia wrote:
> > > > Could you use standard diagnostic check please:
> > > > expected-warning{{unknown OpenCL extension ...
> > > >
> > > > Similarly to SemaOpenCL/extensions.cl
> > > not sure I follow, the test does not trigger any diagnostics (by design).
> > > are you saying that I should introduce negative checks to make sure
> > > extensions are not available outside of their respective context?
> > > Is there a way to filter verifier tags based on clang invocation?
> > > (something like FileCheck prefix)
> > Exactly, you should check that the extensions are enabled correctly based
> > on CL versions.
> >
> > For example if you compile this without passing -cl-std=CL1.2:
> > #pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_gl_msaa_sharing: enable
> > the following error is produced:
> > unsupported OpenCL extension 'cl_khr_gl_msaa_sharing' - ignoring
> >
> > You can condition error directives on CL version passed as it's done in the
> > example test SemaOpenCL/extensions.cl.
> >
> > So what is the original intension of this tests? Not sure I understand what
> > you are trying to test.
> it's a positive test that checks that extensions are available (both that the
> define is present, and that #pragma passes without error).
>
> I did not include negative tests (check that extension is not available
> outside of its respective context), because I think it's a bit overzealous
> reading of the specs.
> For example cl_khr_d3d10_sharing is first mentioned in OpenCL 1.1 specs, but
> the text of the extension says that it is written against OpenCL 1.0.48 spec.
> (I moved cl_khr_icd to 1.0 for the same reason). I think if a vendor can add
> vendor specific extensions to the list of supported extensions, it should be
> possible to add extensions from higher CL versions.
>
> similarly, I would argue against warnings for extensions promoted to core
> features (or at least hide the warning behind -pedantic). they are listed in
> CL_DEVICE_EXTENSIONS for backwards compatibility so I'd say it is OK to allow
> pragmas in higher CLC versions for backward compatibility.
I agree with this:
"similarly, I would argue against warnings for extensions promoted to core
features (or at least hide the warning behind -pedantic). they are listed in
CL_DEVICE_EXTENSIONS for backwards compatibility so I'd say it is OK to allow
pragmas in higher CLC versions for backward compatibility."
@yaxunl, what's your opinion here?
Regarding the test, I think we should still check the diagnostics being given
correctly especially for the extensions unavailable in the earlier versions. It
should be quite straight forward to extend this test.
Repository:
rL LLVM
http://reviews.llvm.org/D20447
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D20447: [OpenCL] Fixup extension list
jvesely added inline comments.
Comment at: test/SemaOpenCL/extension-version.cl:11
@@ +10,3 @@
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_clang_storage_class_specifiers: enable
+
Anastasia wrote:
> jvesely wrote:
> > Anastasia wrote:
> > > Could you use standard diagnostic check please:
> > > expected-warning{{unknown OpenCL extension ...
> > >
> > > Similarly to SemaOpenCL/extensions.cl
> > not sure I follow, the test does not trigger any diagnostics (by design).
> > are you saying that I should introduce negative checks to make sure
> > extensions are not available outside of their respective context?
> > Is there a way to filter verifier tags based on clang invocation?
> > (something like FileCheck prefix)
> Exactly, you should check that the extensions are enabled correctly based on
> CL versions.
>
> For example if you compile this without passing -cl-std=CL1.2:
> #pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_gl_msaa_sharing: enable
> the following error is produced:
> unsupported OpenCL extension 'cl_khr_gl_msaa_sharing' - ignoring
>
> You can condition error directives on CL version passed as it's done in the
> example test SemaOpenCL/extensions.cl.
>
> So what is the original intension of this tests? Not sure I understand what
> you are trying to test.
it's a positive test that checks that extensions are available (both that the
define is present, and that #pragma passes without error).
I did not include negative tests (check that extension is not available outside
of its respective context), because I think it's a bit overzealous reading of
the specs.
For example cl_khr_d3d10_sharing is first mentioned in OpenCL 1.1 specs, but
the text of the extension says that it is written against OpenCL 1.0.48 spec.
(I moved cl_khr_icd to 1.0 for the same reason). I think if a vendor can add
vendor specific extensions to the list of supported extensions, it should be
possible to add extensions from higher CL versions.
similarly, I would argue against warnings for extensions promoted to core
features (or at least hide the warning behind -pedantic). they are listed in
CL_DEVICE_EXTENSIONS for backwards compatibility so I'd say it is OK to allow
pragmas in higher CLC versions for backward compatibility.
Repository:
rL LLVM
http://reviews.llvm.org/D20447
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D20447: [OpenCL] Fixup extension list
Anastasia added inline comments.
Comment at: test/SemaOpenCL/extension-version.cl:11
@@ +10,3 @@
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_clang_storage_class_specifiers: enable
+
jvesely wrote:
> Anastasia wrote:
> > Could you use standard diagnostic check please:
> > expected-warning{{unknown OpenCL extension ...
> >
> > Similarly to SemaOpenCL/extensions.cl
> not sure I follow, the test does not trigger any diagnostics (by design).
> are you saying that I should introduce negative checks to make sure
> extensions are not available outside of their respective context?
> Is there a way to filter verifier tags based on clang invocation? (something
> like FileCheck prefix)
Exactly, you should check that the extensions are enabled correctly based on CL
versions.
For example if you compile this without passing -cl-std=CL1.2:
#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_gl_msaa_sharing: enable
the following error is produced:
unsupported OpenCL extension 'cl_khr_gl_msaa_sharing' - ignoring
You can condition error directives on CL version passed as it's done in the
example test SemaOpenCL/extensions.cl.
So what is the original intension of this tests? Not sure I understand what you
are trying to test.
Repository:
rL LLVM
http://reviews.llvm.org/D20447
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D20447: [OpenCL] Fixup extension list
Anastasia added inline comments.
Comment at: test/SemaOpenCL/extension-version.cl:11
@@ +10,3 @@
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_clang_storage_class_specifiers: enable
+
Could you use standard diagnostic check please:
expected-warning{{unknown OpenCL extension ...
Similarly to SemaOpenCL/extensions.cl
Repository:
rL LLVM
http://reviews.llvm.org/D20447
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D20447: [OpenCL] Fixup extension list
jvesely retitled this revision from "[OpenCL] cl_khr_msaa_sharing is OpenCL1.2 extension" to "[OpenCL] Fixup extension list". jvesely added a subscriber: cfe-commits. jvesely updated this revision to Diff 58130. jvesely added a comment. I went through the specs and fixed up all I could find. added test Repository: rL LLVM http://reviews.llvm.org/D20447 Files: include/clang/Basic/OpenCLExtensions.def test/SemaOpenCL/extension-version.cl Index: test/SemaOpenCL/extension-version.cl === --- /dev/null +++ test/SemaOpenCL/extension-version.cl @@ -0,0 +1,168 @@ +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -x cl -cl-std=CL %s -verify -triple spir-unknown-unknown +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -x cl -cl-std=CL1.1 %s -verify -triple spir-unknown-unknown +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -x cl -cl-std=CL1.2 %s -verify -triple spir-unknown-unknown +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -x cl -cl-std=CL2.0 %s -verify -triple spir-unknown-unknown +// expected-no-diagnostics + +// Extensions in all versions +#ifndef cl_clang_storage_class_specifiers +#error "Missing cl_clang_storage_class_specifiers define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_clang_storage_class_specifiers: enable + +#ifndef cl_khr_fp16 +#error "Missing cl_khr_fp16 define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_fp16: enable + +#ifndef cl_khr_int64_base_atomics +#error "Missing cl_khr_int64_base_atomics define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_int64_base_atomics: enable + +#ifndef cl_khr_int64_extended_atomics +#error "Missing cl_khr_int64_extended_atomics define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_int64_extended_atomics: enable + +#ifndef cl_khr_gl_sharing +#error "Missing cl_khr_gl_sharing define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_gl_sharing: enable + +#ifndef cl_khr_icd +#error "Missing cl_khr_icd define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_icd: enable + +// COre features in CL 1.1 +#if (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ < 110) +#ifndef cl_khr_byte_addressable_store +#error "Missing cl_khr_byte_addressable_store define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_byte_addressable_store: enable + +#ifndef cl_khr_global_int32_base_atomics +#error "Missing cl_khr_global_int32_base_atomics define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_global_int32_base_atomics: enable + +#ifndef cl_khr_global_int32_extended_atomics +#error "Missing cl_khr_global_int32_extended_atomics define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_global_int32_extended_atomics: enable + +#ifndef cl_khr_local_int32_base_atomics +#error "Missing cl_khr_local_int32_base_atomics define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_local_int32_base_atomics: enable + +#ifndef cl_khr_local_int32_extended_atomics +#error "Missing cl_khr_local_int32_extended_atomics define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_local_int32_extended_atomics: enable + +#ifndef cl_khr_select_fprounding_mode +#error "Missing cl_khr_select_fp_rounding_mode define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_select_fprounding_mode: enable + +#endif + +// Core feature in CL 1.2 +#if (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ < 120) +#ifndef cl_khr_fp64 +#error "Missing cl_khr_fp64 define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_fp64: enable +#endif + +//Core feature in CL 2.0 +#if (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ < 200) +#ifndef cl_khr_3d_image_writes +#error "Missing cl_khr_3d_image_writes define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_3d_image_writes: enable +#endif + + +#if (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ >= 110) +#ifndef cl_khr_gl_event +#error "Missing cl_khr_gl_event define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_gl_event: enable + +#ifndef cl_khr_d3d10_sharing +#error "Missing cl_khr_d3d10_sharing define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_d3d10_sharing: enable +#endif + +#if (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ >= 120) +#ifndef cl_khr_context_abort +#error "Missing cl_context_abort define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_context_abort: enable + +#ifndef cl_khr_d3d11_sharing +#error "Missing cl_khr_d3d11_sharing define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_d3d10_sharing: enable + +#ifndef cl_khr_dx9_media_sharing +#error "Missing cl_khr_dx9_media_sharing define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_dx9_media_sharing: enable + +#ifndef cl_khr_image2d_from_buffer +#error "Missing cl_khr_image2d_from_buffer define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_image2d_from_buffer: enable + +#ifndef cl_khr_initialize_memory +#error "Missing cl_khr_initialize_memory define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_initialize_memory: enable + +#ifndef cl_khr_gl_depth_images +#error "Missing cl_khr_gl_depth_images define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_gl_depth_images: enable + +#ifndef cl_khr_gl_msaa_sharing +#error "Missing cl_khr_gl_msaa_sharing define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_gl_msaa_sharing: enable + +#ifndef cl_khr_spir +#error "Missing cl_khr_spir define" +#endif +#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_spir: enable +#endif + +#if (__OPENCL_C_VERSION__ >= 200) +#ifndef cl_khr_egl_event +#error "Missing
