>     We can directly query the available local device memory (which is the
>     reason why I added all this buffering to the device class). Am I missing
>     something?
> Yes, we could. But having the combination {vendor, local memory} seems a
> bit weird to me, I think {vendor, generation} makes more sense, don't
> you think?

{vendor, generation} is the natural format for the handling the profile 
internally, yes. This will presumably involve string parsing of the 
device name, yes :-(

However, the local memory available might vary between devices of the 
same generation (think of desktop vs. mobile), so probably we extend it to:
   {vendor, generation, min_local_mem_required}
If the device does not have enough local memory even though it is mapped 
correctly to a certain generation, we simply fall back to a legacy 
profile which stays within the 16kB.

Best regards,

Get 100% visibility into Java/.NET code with AppDynamics Lite!
It's a free troubleshooting tool designed for production.
Get down to code-level detail for bottlenecks, with <2% overhead. 
Download for free and get started troubleshooting in minutes. 
ViennaCL-devel mailing list

Reply via email to