Anastasia added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/test/CodeGenOpenCL/spir_version.cl:2 +// RUN: %clang_cc1 %s -triple "spir-unknown-unknown" -emit-llvm -o - -cl-std=CL1.0 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-SPIR-CL10 // RUN: %clang_cc1 %s -triple "spir-unknown-unknown" -emit-llvm -o - -cl-std=CL1.2 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-SPIR-CL12 // RUN: %clang_cc1 %s -triple "spir-unknown-unknown" -emit-llvm -o - -cl-std=CL2.0 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-SPIR-CL20 ---------------- svenvh wrote: > Would it be worth having an invocation without any `-cl-std=` and verifying > that it produces the same version metadata as CL1.2? From a unit test perspective, I personally think that it is sufficient to test that the default version is CL1.2 separately and then test the expected functionality of CL1.2 separately. Otherwise when we change the default version later we will need to modify all the tests again. I don't see a value in this. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D106504/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D106504 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
