yaxunl added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D28058#645399, @dmitry wrote:
> @yaxunl, we already have the similar issue for atomics. Probably we can > extend typedef semantic checks but I don't think it's a good idea since C and > C++ have the similar problem but they don't provide special treatment for > types from their standard libraries. I think the proposed approach conforms > to general practice and I also think that it's better than to check canonical > type and therefore to restrict ndrange_t with a particular non-standard > implementation or do you envision something different from the canonical type > checking in mind? My concern is mainly about the representation and name mangling of ndrange_t in IR, not just about type checking. However I assume this may not be an issue if all users use the same opencl-c.h header file to compile the kernel for spir target. Can you address Anastasia's comment about byval attribute of arguments of ndrange_t type? Thanks. https://reviews.llvm.org/D28058 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
