tra added a comment. In D120132#3351999 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D120132#3351999>, @yaxunl wrote:
> In D120132#3351853 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D120132#3351853>, @tra wrote: > >> In D120132#3351391 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D120132#3351391>, @yaxunl wrote: >> >>> >> >> >> >>> If any input file is HIP program, clang driver will use HIP offload kind >>> for all inputs. This behavior is similar as cuda-clang. >> >> I do not think this is the case as illustrated by the example above. CUDA >> paths are only added to CUDA compilation. C++ compilation of `b.cc` does not >> have any of them. > > I noticed that with "-c" HIP/CUDA include path is not used for C++ program. > However without "-c" HIP/CUDA include path is used for C++ program. Probably > this is a bug. This is, indeed, a bug. cc1 invocation for a C++ file should have remained the same, yet we're passing not only include paths but also a bunch of other CUDA-related options that are not relevant for C++ compilation. > In the current patch, AddClangSystemIncludeArgs is modified to add HIP > include path. However, there is no good way to know if the current job action > is HIP or C++ program. > > The signature of AddClangSystemIncludeArgs is > > void Linux::AddClangSystemIncludeArgs(const ArgList &DriverArgs, > ArgStringList &CC1Args) const ; > > In the case of two input files `a.hip` and `b.cpp`, DriverArgs contain both > `a.hip` and `b.cpp`. Clang does not know if the call of > AddClangSystemIncludeArgs is for `a.hip` or `b.cpp`. The current patch adds > HIP include path for both HIP and C++ programs. > > To fix this issue, we either need to add a JobAction argument to > AddClangSystemIncludeArgs to let clang know the current call of > AddClangSystemIncludeArgs is for HIP program or C++ program, or we need to > add HIP include path in a location where the current JobAction is known. I think we first need to figure out first why compilation w/o `-c` behaves incorrectly and what we can do about it. I suspect if we fix it and make clang add options consistently regardless of whether we use `-c` or not, then we would not need to pass job info around. That is, unless the fix is to pass that info around. :-/ IMO mixed-language compilation falls into a grey area where it may sometimes work, but I doubt it's expected to work in general. I don't think it's worth complicating things over it. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D120132/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D120132 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
