jdoerfert added a comment.
typo in the title.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/CodeGen/CGOpenMPRuntime.h:1444
+ /// alloca address where the runtime returns the device pointers.
+ llvm::DenseMap<const ValueDecl *, llvm::Value *> CaptureDeviceAddrMap;
};
----------------
If it is an alloca (for sure) use `llvm::AllocaInst`.
================
Comment at: clang/test/OpenMP/target_data_use_device_ptr_codegen.cpp:418
- // CK2: [[VAL1:%.+]] = load ptr, ptr [[BP1]],
- // CK2: store ptr [[VAL1]], ptr [[PVT1:%.+]],
// CK2: store ptr [[PVT1]], ptr [[_PVT1:%.+]],
----------------
Did we just change the order or is this non-deterministic? The latter is not
acceptable, the former might be.
================
Comment at: llvm/lib/Frontend/OpenMP/OMPIRBuilder.cpp:4131
+ for (auto DeviceMap : Info.DevicePtrInfoMap) {
+ if (isa<AllocaInst>(DeviceMap.second.second)) {
+ auto *LI =
----------------
What else could it be here?
================
Comment at: llvm/lib/Frontend/OpenMP/OMPIRBuilder.cpp:4694
+ } else if (CombinedInfo.DevicePointers[I] == DeviceInfoTy::Address) {
+ Info.DevicePtrInfoMap[BPVal] = {BP, BP};
+ assert(DeviceAddrCB &&
----------------
What if the PointerBCOrASCast and the GEP are both no-ops, and BPVal is an
alloca. Would that cause a problem as we later only check if the type of the
value is an alloca. That said, it seems dangerous to only rely on the type of
the value.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D152554/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D152554
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
