Anastasia added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/lib/Headers/opencl-c-base.h:329 #endif // defined(__opencl_c_atomic_scope_all_devices) -#if defined(cl_intel_subgroups) || defined(cl_khr_subgroups) +#if defined(cl_intel_subgroups) || defined(cl_khr_subgroups) || defined(__opencl_c_subgroups) memory_scope_sub_group = __OPENCL_MEMORY_SCOPE_SUB_GROUP ---------------- azabaznov wrote: > Anastasia wrote: > > We had a discussion with @azabaznov around features that are aliasing each > > other and we have discussed to use one feature macro for those. Clang > > should already ensure that both are set/unset simultaneously? And for those > > that are not set in clang we can set them correctly here in the header > > directly. > > > Yeah, I we did. Note that this is applicable to fp64 and 3d image writes, > while __openc_c_subgroups and cl_khr_subgroups are not equivalent as > extension requires subgroup-independent forward progress but > subgroup-independent forward progress is optional in OpenCL C 3.0. I'll try > submit a patch for 3d image writes feature macro support this week. Ok, I see so while the functions are identical they are not entirely equivalent extensions so vendors might support one but not the other? In this case I think we should keep checking both but it would be good to add a comment explaining why we are checking both macros here. Btw do you happen to have spec reference? I can't find anything relevant. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D105858/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D105858 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
