ping for comments/objections/exasperation on this general approach?
Regards,
Dave
-Original Message-
From: David Tweed [mailto:david.tw...@arm.com]
Sent: 27 November 2012 16:11
To: David Tweed; 'Eli Friedman'
Cc: 'Pekka Jääskeläinen'; 'cfe-commits@cs.uiuc.edu'
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2]
Revised patch actually attached.
-Original Message-
From: David Tweed [mailto:david.tw...@arm.com]
Sent: 27 November 2012 16:09
To: 'Eli Friedman'
Cc: Pekka Jääskeläinen; cfe-commits@cs.uiuc.edu
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] Set some OpenCl specification mandated
types/alignments/etc
Hi Eli,
Hi Eli, thanks for the feedback. In general I've tested everything I know
how to test using only the output of a compilation.
| Why are you messing with LargeArrayMinWidth and LargeArrayAlign?
| Please explain in the patch and add tests.
That looks like something I forgot was an implementation
Following the comments, it looks like there's not a strong objection to
doing OpenCL mandated configuration this way and some support for this. So
the attached patch is modified as suggested to use a specific target when
testing the sizes/alignments. Unless there are further objections I'll
commit
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 9:05 AM, David Tweed david.tw...@arm.com wrote:
Following the comments, it looks like there's not a strong objection to
doing OpenCL mandated configuration this way and some support for this. So
the attached patch is modified as suggested to use a specific target when
