[PATCH] D103401: [OpenCL] Add support of __opencl_c_generic_address_space feature macro
Anton Zabaznov via Phabricator via cfe-commits
cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org
Tue Jun 1 05:16:17 PDT 2021
azabaznov added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Basic/TargetInfo.cpp:405
+ const auto &OpenCLFeaturesMap = getSupportedOpenCLOpts();
+ Opts.OpenCLGenericAddressSpace = hasFeatureEnabled(
+ OpenCLFeaturesMap, "__opencl_c_generic_address_space");
----------------
Anastasia wrote:
> svenvh wrote:
> > This means we now have two separate places that set `OpenCLGenericAddressSpace`, the other place being in `CompilerInvocation::setLangDefaults()`. That feels like a maintenance hazard. Do you think it makes sense to set this field in one single place instead?
> I think we should try to set it in `CompilerInvocation.cpp` directly, we should be able to query `TargetOptions` there. Although that place is expected to be for the language-specific defaults but we broke the standard flow by having the language mode controlled by the target settings anyway.
>
> I can't remember though why we have decided to add dedicated `LangOpts` entries for generic address space instead of just using `OpenCLOptions` from `Sema`? I think it simplifies the handling of some builtin functions?
> This means we now have two separate places that set OpenCLGenericAddressSpace, the other place being in CompilerInvocation::setLangDefaults(). That feels like a maintenance hazard. Do you think it makes sense to set this field in one single place instead?
>I think we should try to set it in CompilerInvocation.cpp directly, we should be able to query TargetOptions there.
I don't think that we are able to access target options at that stage without modifying current interfaces. `CompilerInvocation::setLangDefaults()` is a static member function.
> I can't remember though why we have decided to add dedicated LangOpts entries for generic address space instead of just using OpenCLOptions from Sema? I think it simplifies the handling of some builtin functions?
That's correct. Also, the idea was to reuse generic keyword in other languages.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D103401/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D103401
More information about the cfe-commits
mailing list