[PATCH] D152403: [Clang][CUDA] Disable diagnostics for neon attrs for GPU-side CUDA compilation

[Artem Belevich via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

tra accepted this revision.
tra added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.

LGTM with a nit.



================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaType.cpp:8168
+    IsTargetCUDAAndHostARM =
+        !AuxTI || AuxTI->getTriple().isAArch64() || AuxTI->getTriple().isARM();
+  }
----------------
alexander-shaposhnikov wrote:
> tra wrote:
> > Should it be `AuxTI && (AuxTI->getTriple().isAArch64() || AuxTI->getTriple().isARM();)` ?
> > 
> > I don't think we want IsTargetCUDAAndHostARM to be set to true if there's no auxTargetInfo (e.g. during any C++ compilation, regardless of the target).
> we get here only if S.getLangOpts().CUDAIsDevice is true, so not for an arbitrary c++ compilation,
> iirc AuxTI was null for some tests, but I'm happy to double check,
> AuxTI && ... looks better to me too.
I'd still prefer to have `()` around `AuxTI->getTriple().isAArch64() || AuxTI->getTriple().isARM()`.



================
Comment at: clang/test/SemaCUDA/neon-attrs.cu:2
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple arm64-linux-gnu -target-feature +neon -x cuda -fsyntax-only -DNO_DIAG -verify %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple arm64-linux-gnu -target-feature -neon -x cuda -fsyntax-only -verify %s
+
----------------
alexander-shaposhnikov wrote:
> tra wrote:
> > You should also pass `-aux-triple nvptx64...`.
> > 
> > This also needs more test cases. This only tests host-side CUDA compilation.
> > We also need:
> > ```
> > // GPU-side compilation on ARM (no errors expected)
> > // RUN: %clang_cc1 -aux-triple arm64-linux-gnu -triple nvptx64 -fcuda-is-device  -x cuda -fsyntax-only -DNO_DIAG -verify %s
> > // Regular C++ compilation on x86 and ARM without neon (should produce diagnostics) 
> > // RUN: %clang_cc1  -triple x86.... -x c++ -fsyntax-only -verify %s
> > // RUN: %clang_cc1  -triple arm64... -x c++ -target-feature -neon -fsyntax-only -verify %s
> > // C++ on ARM w/ neon (no diagnostics)
> > // RUN: %clang_cc1  -triple arm64... -x c++ -target-feature +neon -fsyntax-only -DNO_DIAG -verify %s
> > ``` 
> regular C++ compilation is covered by other in-tree tests, do we really need it here ?
If it's already covered (for x86, too?), then you can skip c++ tests.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D152403/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D152403