Anastasia added inline comments.
================
Comment at: test/SemaOpenCL/extension-version.cl:11
@@ +10,3 @@
+#endif
+#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_clang_storage_class_specifiers: enable
+
----------------
jvesely wrote:
> Anastasia wrote:
> > Could you use standard diagnostic check please:
> > expected-warning{{unknown OpenCL extension ...
> >
> > Similarly to SemaOpenCL/extensions.cl
> not sure I follow, the test does not trigger any diagnostics (by design).
> are you saying that I should introduce negative checks to make sure
> extensions are not available outside of their respective context?
> Is there a way to filter verifier tags based on clang invocation? (something
> like FileCheck prefix)
Exactly, you should check that the extensions are enabled correctly based on CL
versions.
For example if you compile this without passing -cl-std=CL1.2:
#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_gl_msaa_sharing: enable
the following error is produced:
unsupported OpenCL extension 'cl_khr_gl_msaa_sharing' - ignoring
You can condition error directives on CL version passed as it's done in the
example test SemaOpenCL/extensions.cl.
So what is the original intension of this tests? Not sure I understand what you
are trying to test.
Repository:
rL LLVM
http://reviews.llvm.org/D20447
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
