b-sumner added a comment. In D114957#3166936 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D114957#3166936>, @foad wrote:
> In D114957#3166858 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D114957#3166858>, @yaxunl wrote: > >> In D114957#3166817 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D114957#3166817>, @foad wrote: >> >>> This is a flag-day change to the signatures of the LLVM intrinsics and the >>> OpenCL builtins. Is that OK? >> >> This breaks users' code. If we have to do this, at least let clang emit a >> pre-defined macro e.g. `__amdgcn_bvh_use_vec3__`=1 so that users can make >> their code work before and after the change. > > I don't know anything about OpenCL macros. Is it good enough to put this in > `AMDGPUTargetInfo::getTargetDefines`: > > if (Opts.OpenCL) > Builder.defineMacro("__amdgcn_bvh_use_vec3__"); > > Does it need tests, documentation, etc? But how long would that be carried? And then deprecated? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D114957/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D114957 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
