This patch looks fine to me. — Mon Ping
On Aug 27, 2013, at 4:12 PM, Michele Scandale <[email protected]> wrote: > On 08/24/2013 04:02 PM, Michele Scandale wrote: >> The pure solution would be the one proposed by Eli: I don't have any >> objection >> to this solution. >> The mangler now has a bug, so it must be fixed. The pure solution implicitly >> breaks the binary compatibility. If we do not have problem with this (so we >> consider a matter for the users to solve the problem, e.g. with a forced >> update >> of libraries) the right patch is to have a target independent mangling for >> OpenCL. >> >> Still we would have problems if we consider SPIR: in its specification there >> is >> a fixed mangling scheme (that it's the one produced by the current mangler). >> In >> this case we have two choice: we change the SPIR mangling or we allow >> targets to >> override the target independent mangling for OpenCL with the one based on the >> TargetAddrSpaceMap. >> >> *Based on all this would see the mangling proposed by Eli the default except >> for >> targets that explicitly requires a mangling scheme based on the target >> address >> spaces map (e.g. the SPIR target).* > > In attachment a proposal to implement target independent mangling with the > option for targets to force the use of target address space based mangling. > > Regards, > -Michele > <mangling-rev5.patch>_______________________________________________ > 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
