jyu2 added inline comments.

================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/Sema.cpp:241
+      (Context.getAuxTargetInfo() &&
+       Context.getAuxTargetInfo()->hasInt128Type())) {
     // If either of the 128-bit integer types are unavailable to name lookup,
----------------
jyu2 wrote:
> jdoerfert wrote:
> > jyu2 wrote:
> > > jdoerfert wrote:
> > > > I don't understand why this (and the changes below) are necessary. Host 
> > > > and device compilation are separate. This should not be any different 
> > > > to CUDA, HIP, or OpenMP offload which seem not to require this.
> > > As far as I can know, in real compile, the auxtarget should be also set 
> > > for example SYCL.  May be that is only for our compiler.  I am not sure 
> > > what do you mean by it should same with CUDA, HIP...?  Do you mean, 
> > > CUDA(or HIP...) target should also not support 128-bit integer?  If so, I 
> > > don't see any error emit for CUDA when I try with nvptx64-nvidia-cuda.
> > > 
> > > Thanks.
> > > 
> > I'm not saying auxtarget is not set. I'm trying to understand why this is 
> > necessary. Why would you initialize `__int128_t` if your target doesn't 
> > support it? What happens if you only include the SPIR.h change?
> Without this change you will see error:
> 
> j3.c:2:15: error: unknown type name '__uint128_t'
> typedef const __uint128_t  megeType;
> 
> bash-4.4$ cat j3.c
> 
> typedef const __uint128_t  megeType;
> 
> Without change in SemaOverload.c:
> you will see error:
> x.cpp:3:14: error: use of overloaded operator '==' is ambiguous (with operand 
> types 'struct X' and '__int128')
>   bool a = x == __int128(0);
>            ~ ^  ~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> bash-4.4$ cat x.cpp
> namespace PR12964 {
>   struct X { operator  __int128() const; } x;
>   bool a = x == __int128(0);
> }
> 
> 
> 
Just one more point, the errors only need to be emitted for 128-bit integer 
used inside device code.  The test case above 128-bit integer is not used in 
device code, so we don't want to emit error for it.

Thanks.
Jennifer


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D92439/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D92439

_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to