yaxunl added a comment. In D57527#1379159 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D57527#1379159>, @rjmccall wrote:
> In D57527#1379088 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D57527#1379088>, @yaxunl wrote: > > > In D57527#1379065 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D57527#1379065>, @rjmccall > > wrote: > > > > > Okay, so you silently have an incompatible ABI for anything in the system > > > headers that mentions `long double`. Do you have any plans to address or > > > work around that, or is the hope that it just doesn't matter? > > > > > > I feel like this should be a special case for AMDGPU rather than a > > > general behavior with aux targets. > > > > > > If host do not pass long double to device we will be fine. So we need to > > diagnose long double kernel arguments. However I'd like to do it in > > separate patch since we want to fix the regression first. > > > Okay. Do you also need to look for global structs and other way that > information might be passed? I suppose at some level you just have to > document it as a danger and treat further diagnostics as QoI. I created a pull request to document long double usage in HIP https://github.com/ROCm-Developer-Tools/HIP/pull/890 CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D57527/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D57527 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
