<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<style type="text/css" style="display:none;"> P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;} </style>
</head>
<body dir="ltr">
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
hi Anton,</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
> Regarding disagreements between specification and implementation: what now comes to mind is that it is worth mentioning that clang supports compilation only for FULL OpenCL profile, not EMBEDDED profile (https://github.com/KhronosGroup/OpenCL-Docs/blob/master/api/embedded_profile.asciidoc).
Though we can discuss if we plan to support compilation for EMBEDDED OpenCL profile in clang.<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
Good point. Thanks! I will try to prepare an update to the docs for review in the next days.</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<p style="font-size:11pt; font-family:Calibri,sans-serif; margin:0"><span style="font-family: calibri, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0);">> I could do some research to find a proper way to
define those macros somehow else (except '-D' flag) and this can be reused for extensions which are mentioned in II section of your letter (http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2020-September/066911.html).</span></p>
<p style="font-size:11pt; font-family:Calibri,sans-serif; margin:0"><span style="font-family: calibri, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0);"><br>
</span></p>
<p style="font-size:11pt; font-family:Calibri,sans-serif; margin:0"><span style="font-family: calibri, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0);">Sounds good!<br>
</span></p>
<p style="font-size:11pt; font-family:Calibri,sans-serif; margin:0"><span style="font-family: calibri, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0);"><br>
</span></p>
<p style="font-size:11pt; font-family:Calibri,sans-serif; margin:0"><span style="font-family: calibri, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0);">> However, I don't see any strong concerns about
current implementation in defining such macros since all the extensions are already defined only in OpenCLExtensions.def, so this approach is already unified for extensions of all types.</span></p>
<p style="font-size:11pt; font-family:Calibri,sans-serif; margin:0"><span style="font-family: calibri, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0);"><br>
</span></p>
<p style="font-size:11pt; font-family:Calibri,sans-serif; margin:0"><span style="font-family: calibri, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0);">It is not the end of the world but currently if an
extension is added into <span style="font-size: 12pt; background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0)">
OpenCLExtensions.def aside from macro it will result in a pragma and extra items in the target options which aren't really used. At the same time if we only need to define a macro clang and C language provides so many mechanisms to do this. I feel like we have
reinvented the wheel.</span><br>
</span></p>
<p style="font-size:11pt; font-family:Calibri,sans-serif; margin:0"><span style="font-family: calibri, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0);"><br>
</span></p>
<p style="font-size:11pt; font-family:Calibri,sans-serif; margin:0"><span style="font-family: calibri, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0);">> Perhaps we could extend current functionality of
'-cl-ext' to allow registering new custom features/extensions which affect header only. Also, we can differentiate if extension or feature is used only in header by adding a flag into definition in OpenCLExtensions.def file.</span></p>
<p style="font-size:11pt; font-family:Calibri,sans-serif; margin:0"><span style="font-family: calibri, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0);"><br>
</span></p>
<p style="font-size:11pt; font-family:Calibri,sans-serif; margin:0"><span style="font-family: calibri, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0);">Yes these could be good options. Perhaps we could
also think of providing some target hooks for <span style="font-size: 12pt; background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0)">
OpenCLExtensions.def</span>.</span></p>
<p style="font-size:11pt; font-family:Calibri,sans-serif; margin:0"><span style="font-family: calibri, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0);"><br>
</span></p>
<p style="font-size:11pt; font-family:Calibri,sans-serif; margin:0"><span style="font-family: calibri, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0);">Overall I just feel if every extension is added into
clang source code this won't scale, especially that vendor extensions are only valid for a subset of targets and it is annoying to add them into the common code. So if we provide hooks to register extensions instead, it will simplify upstream code and also
simplify out-of-tree implementations that won't be bound by upstream if they need to add new extensions.</span></p>
<p style="font-size:11pt; font-family:Calibri,sans-serif; margin:0"><span style="font-family: calibri, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0);"><br>
</span></p>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
Cheers,</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
Anastasia<br>
</div>
<div id="appendonsend"></div>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:12pt; color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<br>
</div>
<hr tabindex="-1" style="display:inline-block; width:98%">
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font style="font-size:11pt" face="Calibri, sans-serif" color="#000000"><b>From:</b> Zabaznov, Anton <anton.zabaznov@intel.com><br>
<b>Sent:</b> 02 October 2020 11:19<br>
<b>To:</b> cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org <cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org>; Anastasia Stulova <Anastasia.Stulova@arm.com><br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [cfe-dev] [RFC] OpenCL C 3.0 support in clang</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div lang="EN-US">
<div class="x_WordSection1">
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
Hi, Anastasia! Thanks for your reply.</p>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
</p>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
Regarding disagreements between specification and implementation: what now comes to mind is that it is worth mentioning that clang supports compilation only for FULL OpenCL profile, not EMBEDDED profile (https://github.com/KhronosGroup/OpenCL-Docs/blob/master/api/embedded_profile.asciidoc).
Though we can discuss if we plan to support compilation for EMBEDDED OpenCL profile in clang.</p>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
</p>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
I also checked out the proposal about simplification in extension mechanism: there is something common with OpenCL features, especially there are features which affect only internal opencl-c.h header, such as:</p>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
</p>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
__opencl_c_atomic_scope_device</p>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
__opencl_c_atomic_scope_all_devices</p>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
__opencl_c_work_group_collective_functions.</p>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
</p>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
I could do some research to find a proper way to define those macros somehow else (except '-D' flag) and this can be reused for extensions which are mentioned in II section of your letter (http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2020-September/066911.html).
However, I don't see any strong concerns about current implementation in defining such macros since all the extensions are already defined only in OpenCLExtensions.def, so this approach is already unified for extensions of all types. Perhaps we could extend
current functionality of '-cl-ext' to allow registering new custom features/extensions which affect header only. Also, we can differentiate if extension or feature is used only in header by adding a flag into definition in OpenCLExtensions.def file.</p>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
</p>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
Regards,</p>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
Anton</p>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
</p>
<div>
<div style="border:none; border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt; padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<b>From:</b> Anastasia Stulova <Anastasia.Stulova@arm.com> <br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, September 30, 2020 1:33 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org; Zabaznov, Anton <anton.zabaznov@intel.com><br>
<b>Cc:</b> nd <nd@arm.com><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [cfe-dev] [RFC] OpenCL C 3.0 support in clang</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
</p>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black">Hi Anton,</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black">Thank you for this exciting announcement. It is great to see clang continuing
</span></p>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black">to provide support for evolving OpenCL C standards. However, I would like to
</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black">highlight the following - considering that the specification has been released
</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black">without the upstream implementation, it is possible that some functionality
</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black">wouldn't be implemented without the need of modifying the specification or
</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black">deviating from the specification. As a matter of fact, this is not specific to
</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black">OpenCL 3.0 and there were several such issues while implementing the</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black">earlier standards. I would like to be more diligent this time to document what</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black">is not conformant to the spec, this page should be a good place</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black"><a href="https://clang.llvm.org/docs/LanguageExtensions.html" title="https://clang.llvm.org/docs/LanguageExtensions.html">https://clang.llvm.org/docs/LanguageExtensions.html</a>.
</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black">There is one aspect that would be good to clarify before we start implementing
</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black">the features - what would be the interface for the targets to set the feature
</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black">presence? For example for extensions, different approaches were used i.e.
</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black">- Adding to clang source code i.e. target setting. Those could also be amended
</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black">using -cl-ext flag.</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black">- Outside of clang the extension macros could be defined in headers or using</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black">pre-processor flags -D. </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black">I understand that if we follow the first approach only we will provide a more
</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black">unified interface but however, we end up adding something in clang that
</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black">won't be used in the parser itself. However, for the second approach, we end</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black">up with more heterogeneity but provide higher flexibility to add any custom
</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black">extensions as well as simplifying the clang code base. For the features it is</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black">less critical as they are all known, it is also possible that future standards will
</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black">define new features or remove existing ones.
</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black">FYI I have provided more details regarding this topic on a separate RFC:</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black"><a href="http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2020-September/066911.html" title="http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2020-September/066911.html">http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2020-September/066911.html</a></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black">Kind regards,</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black">Anastasia</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size:12.0pt; color:black"> </span></p>
</div>
<div class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;text-align:center" align="center">
<hr width="98%" size="2" align="center">
</div>
<div id="x_divRplyFwdMsg">
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<b><span style="color:black">From:</span></b><span style="color:black"> cfe-dev <<a href="mailto:cfe-dev-bounces@lists.llvm.org">cfe-dev-bounces@lists.llvm.org</a>> on behalf of Zabaznov, Anton via cfe-dev <<a href="mailto:cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org">cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>><br>
<b>Sent:</b> 25 September 2020 14:36<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org">cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org</a> <<a href="mailto:cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org">cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [cfe-dev] [RFC] OpenCL C 3.0 support in clang</span> </p>
<div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
</p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="x_xmsonormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
Hi! I'm happy to announce OpenCL C 3.0 support in clang.</p>
<p class="x_xmsonormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
</p>
<p class="x_xmsonormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
Language specification is available at <a href="https://github.com/KhronosGroup/OpenCL-Docs">
https://github.com/KhronosGroup/OpenCL-Docs</a>. OpenCL C 3.0 language standard is now backward compatible with 1.2 and makes 2.0 features optional. New OpenCL language specification is important because it allows platform vendors to optionally support OpenCL
C 2.0 features which are no longer required for compliance with the core specification. This allows vendors to port OpenCL implementations on high variety of devices by choosing necessary functionality to implement. Such vendors as Intel and ARM are highly
interested in OpenCL C 3.0. So I encourage everyone else who is also looking forward for OpenCL C 3.0 support in clang to take part in the following discussions and reviews.</p>
<p class="x_xmsonormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
</p>
<p class="x_xmsonormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
In OpenCL 3.0 support of various features is indicated with a feature test macros. This is pretty much similar to C++ feature test macros but the difference is that the presence and the value of the latter directly relates to C++ language standard. The presence
of feature test macros in OpenCL C 3.0 in the contrary is target specific: macros are being optionally defined by the frontend compiler depending on whether the target architecture supports feature or not.</p>
<p class="x_xmsonormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
</p>
<p class="x_xmsonormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
------- Implementation Details -------</p>
<p class="x_xmsonormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
</p>
<p class="x_xmsonormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
First it is worth mentioning that there are no big conceptual changes in clang expected since OpenCL C 3.0 makes 2.0 features optional. I've been working on OpenCL C 3.0 support in Intel and full patch is already published in Intel opencl-clang repo:</p>
<p class="x_xmsonormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
</p>
<p class="x_xmsonormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<a href="https://github.com/intel/opencl-clang/tree/ocl-open-110/patches/clang">https://github.com/intel/opencl-clang/tree/ocl-open-110/patches/clang</a></p>
<p class="x_xmsonormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
</p>
<p class="x_xmsonormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
There already exists such concept as extensions in OpenCL C language specification which has a similar meaning with OpenCL features. The difference between two of them is that OpenCL extensions are not the part of core specification and require special pragma
directive to enable them. Despite the fact that features and extensions are different I tried to reuse the current extension mechanism in clang as much as possible to avoid code duplication. Also, I'm going to introduce new LangOpts flags for OpenCL C specific
keywords such as 'generic' and 'pipe'; and 'OPENCLBUILTIN' concept (instead of 'LANGBUILTIN') to forward OpenCL C feature name as a parameter.</p>
<p class="x_xmsonormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
</p>
<p class="x_xmsonormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
The main idea behind proposed implementation is that feature tests macros are being defined by compiler in all OpenCL versions and can't be disabled in versions prior to 3.0. This unified approach will help to avoid additional checks when identifying various
types and built-ins support for all OpenCL versions in both: in clang and opencl-c.h header. Also, it logically expresses compiler behavior for other OpenCL versions, for example: OpenCL C 2.0 supports generic address space by default thus '__opencl_c_generic_address_space'
macro is defined when '-cl-std=CL2.0' option is used.</p>
<p class="x_xmsonormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
</p>
<p class="x_xmsonormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
There are some cases when for OpenCL C 3.0 feature already exists equivalent OpenCL C extension ('__opencl_c_3d_image_writes' and 'cl_khr_3d_image_writes'). The strategy which I decided to follow here is to provide simultaneous test macro presence for both:
for feature and corresponding extension because they describe same functionality. Additionally, the reason for this is backward compatibility: there may be older applications where extension macro is checked instead of feature macro. With this approach older
applications will continue to compile with OpenCL C 3.0</p>
<p class="x_xmsonormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
</p>
<p class="x_xmsonormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
Please let me know if you have any concerns about this proposal, I would be glad to discuss it.</p>
<p class="x_xmsonormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
--------------------------------------</p>
<p class="x_xmsonormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
</p>
<p class="x_xmsonormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
Here is a very first step on a route to upstreaming of OpenCL C 3.0 support in clang:</p>
<p class="x_xmsonormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
</p>
<p class="x_xmsonormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
<a href="https://reviews.llvm.org/D88300">https://reviews.llvm.org/D88300</a></p>
<p class="x_xmsonormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
</p>
<p class="x_xmsonormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
This initial patch adds option and predefined macros for OpenCL C 3.0 version.</p>
<p class="x_xmsonormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
</p>
<p class="x_xmsonormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
Thanks in advance!</p>
<p class="x_xmsonormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri", sans-serif;">
Anton.</p>
</div>
<p><br>
--------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
Joint Stock Company Intel A/O<br>
Registered legal address: Krylatsky Hills Business Park, <br>
17 Krylatskaya Str., Bldg 4, Moscow 121614, <br>
Russian Federation</p>
<p>This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for<br>
the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution<br>
by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended<br>
recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.</p>
</div>
<p><br>
--------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
Joint Stock Company Intel A/O<br>
Registered legal address: Krylatsky Hills Business Park, <br>
17 Krylatskaya Str., Bldg 4, Moscow 121614, <br>
Russian Federation</p>
<p>This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for<br>
the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution<br>
by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended<br>
recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.</p>
</div>
</body>
</html>