[PATCH] D79526: [CUDA][HIP] Workaround for resolving host device function against wrong-sided function

[Artem Belevich via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

tra added a comment.

I've tested the patch on our sources and it still breaks tensorflow compilation, though in a different way:

  In file included from third_party/tensorflow/core/kernels/slice_op_gpu.cu.cc:22:
  In file included from ./third_party/tensorflow/core/framework/register_types.h:20:
  In file included from ./third_party/tensorflow/core/framework/numeric_types.h:28:
  In file included from ./third_party/tensorflow/core/platform/types.h:22:
  In file included from ./third_party/tensorflow/core/platform/tstring.h:24:
  In file included from ./third_party/tensorflow/core/platform/cord.h:23:
  In file included from ./third_party/tensorflow/core/platform/google/cord.h:19:
  In file included from ./third_party/absl/strings/cord.h:89:
  ./third_party/absl/strings/internal/cord_internal.h:34:16: error: no matching constructor for initialization of 'std::atomic<int32_t>' (aka 'atomic<int>')
    Refcount() : count_{1} {}
                 ^     ~~~
  third_party/crosstool/v18/llvm_unstable/toolchain/bin/../include/c++/v1/atomic:1778:8: note: candidate constructor (the implicit copy constructor) not viable: no known conversion from 'int' to 'const std::__u::atomic<int>' for 1st argument
  struct atomic
         ^
  third_party/crosstool/v18/llvm_unstable/toolchain/bin/../include/c++/v1/atomic:1784:5: note: candidate constructor not viable: requires 0 arguments, but 1 was provided
      atomic() _NOEXCEPT _LIBCPP_DEFAULT
      ^
  third_party/crosstool/v18/llvm_unstable/toolchain/bin/../include/c++/v1/atomic:1807:52: error: call to deleted constructor of '__atomic_base<base::scheduling::Schedulable *>'
      _LIBCPP_CONSTEXPR atomic(_Tp* __d) _NOEXCEPT : __base(__d) {}
                                                     ^      ~~~
  ./third_party/absl/base/internal/thread_identity.h:162:66: note: in instantiation of member function 'std::__u::atomic<base::scheduling::Schedulable *>::atomic' requested here
      std::atomic<base::scheduling::Schedulable*> bound_schedulable{nullptr};
                                                                   ^
  third_party/crosstool/v18/llvm_unstable/toolchain/bin/../include/c++/v1/atomic:1675:5: note: '__atomic_base' has been explicitly marked deleted here
      __atomic_base(const __atomic_base&) = delete;
      ^
  third_party/crosstool/v18/llvm_unstable/toolchain/bin/../include/c++/v1/atomic:1786:51: error: call to implicitly-deleted copy constructor of '__atomic_base<long>'
      _LIBCPP_CONSTEXPR atomic(_Tp __d) _NOEXCEPT : __base(__d) {}
                                                    ^      ~~~
  ./third_party/absl/synchronization/mutex.h:927:25: note: in instantiation of member function 'std::__u::atomic<long>::atomic' requested here
  inline Mutex::Mutex() : mu_(0) {
                          ^
  third_party/crosstool/v18/llvm_unstable/toolchain/bin/../include/c++/v1/atomic:1698:7: note: copy constructor of '__atomic_base<long, true>' is implicitly deleted because base class '__atomic_base<long, false>' has a deleted copy constructor
      : public __atomic_base<_Tp, false>
        ^
  third_party/crosstool/v18/llvm_unstable/toolchain/bin/../include/c++/v1/atomic:1675:5: note: '__atomic_base' has been explicitly marked deleted here
      __atomic_base(const __atomic_base&) = delete;
      ^


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D79526/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D79526