It doesn't make sense to me to not translate the address space to something meaningful (something other than a random number). Targets should define the address space map if they are supported.
What problem are you trying to solve? -Tanya On Jul 18, 2013, at 10:11 AM, Michele Scandale <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello to everybody, > > I've noticed a problem in the mangling of function names where address spaces > are used. The problem is related to opencl and cuda address spaces: the target > address space map is used to translate address space, but this conversion can > produce the same mangling from different address space (on X86 all opencl > address spaces are mapped to the address space zero). See attached example. > > Commit r174688 introduced the usage of the target translation map. Reverting > it > seems be ok as a solution. Do you agree with this solution? > > Thanks in advance. > > Best regards. > > Michele Scandale > > > <test.cl> > _______________________________________________ > cfe-commits mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
