[PATCH] D114957: [AMDGPU] Change llvm.amdgcn.image.bvh.intersect.ray to take vec3 args

Yaxun Liu via Phabricator via cfe-commits cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org
Thu Dec 2 07:48:37 PST 2021

yaxunl added a comment.

In D114957#3166974 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D114957#3166974>, @foad wrote:

> In D114957#3166948 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D114957#3166948>, @b-sumner wrote:
>> In D114957#3166936 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D114957#3166936>, @foad wrote:
>>> In D114957#3166858 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D114957#3166858>, @yaxunl wrote:
>>>> In D114957#3166817 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D114957#3166817>, @foad wrote:
>>>>> This is a flag-day change to the signatures of the LLVM intrinsics and the OpenCL builtins. Is that OK?
>>>> This breaks users' code. If we have to do this, at least let clang emit a pre-defined macro e.g. `__amdgcn_bvh_use_vec3__`=1 so that users can make their code work before and after the change.
>>> I don't know anything about OpenCL macros. Is it good enough to put this in `AMDGPUTargetInfo::getTargetDefines`:
>>>   if (Opts.OpenCL)
>>>     Builder.defineMacro("__amdgcn_bvh_use_vec3__");
>>> Does it need tests, documentation, etc?
>> But how long would that be carried?  And then deprecated?
> Then do you think the patch is OK as-is?

Let's discuss with the users and see whether the macro is needed or not.

  rG LLVM Github Monorepo



More information about the cfe-commits mailing list