gtbercea added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D50845#1202973, @ABataev wrote:
> >> If I understand it correctly, the root cause of this exercise is that we > >> want to compile for GPU using plain C. CUDA avoids this issue by > >> separating device and host code via target attributes and clang has few > >> special cases to ignore inline assembly errors in the host code if we're > >> compiling for device. For OpenMP there's no such separation, not in the > >> system headers, at least. > > > > Yes, that's one of the nice properties of CUDA (for the compiler). There > > used to be the same restriction for OpenMP where all functions used in > > `target` regions needed to be put in `declare target`. However that was > > relaxed in favor of implicitly marking all **called** functions in that TU > > to be `declare target`. > > So ideally I think Clang should determine which functions are really > > `declare target` (either explicit or implicit) and only run semantical > > analysis on them. If a function is then found to be "broken" it's perfectly > > desirable to error back to the user. > > It is not possible for OpenMP because we support implicit declare target > functions. Clang cannot identify whether the function is going to be used on > the device or not during sema analysis. Sounds like that is a recipe for just disabling sema analysis for all implicit declare target functions. Repository: rC Clang https://reviews.llvm.org/D50845 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
