[PATCH v3] Set some OpenCl specification mandated types/alignments/etc

[Michele Scandale]

Hello to everybody,

On 08/08/2013 12:10 PM, David Tweed wrote:
> Hi, 
> 
> rom what I recall it was felt that even though these types are precisely
> defined in the OpenCL standard (unlike normal C) it was better that each
> OpenCL implementation should set them within its own subtarget at the same
> time it sets the data layout string (so they're definitely known to be
> consistent). Since doing this was code consolidation rather than new
> functionality we've gone with the consensus and abandoned the patch. (If
> consensus were to change I wouldn't object to a version without the address
> spaces going into clang.)

I am confused by this choice to delegate targets to defines OpenCL builtin type
size/alignment. In OpenCL 'int => signed i32', 'long => signed i64' and so on
whatever the target is.
Why these *target independent* properties should be set by *each* OpenCL
implementation?
I don't agree with this: the TargetInfo derived classes, IMO, are not the right
place where this aspect should be defined.

Thanks in advance.

Regards,
-Michele