ABataev added a comment.
In http://reviews.llvm.org/D21904#472074, @carlo.bertolli wrote:
> I think that Kelvin is right. This is what that sentence refers to:
> int * bla = ..;
> #pragma omp target data use_device_ptr(bla)
> {
>
> .. bla .. // <-- this is the 'reference' that sentence is about
>
> }
>
> What puzzles me about that sentence is that it seems it is asking us to use
> bla as following:
> int addr_bla = &bla;
> // now can use addr_bla
>
> I am specifically referring to this part of the sentence: "must be to the
> address of the list item"
>
> Anyway, as Kelvin says, this has nothing to do with what we expect sema for
> use_device_ptr to accept. Samuel point, but I may be mistaken, is that a
> reference to a pointer should be considered as a pointer itself.
> Alexey: if you do not think this is right, I can add a test that excludes
> references.
>
> Finally, thanks for the very quick review and for all your comments
>
> - Carlo
Carlo, I'm not sure about this sentence at all. If you think that this
construct may accept references to pointers, then go ahead and ignore my
previous comment.
Repository:
rL LLVM
http://reviews.llvm.org/D21904
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
