tra added inline comments.
================ Comment at: test/Driver/cuda-bail-out.cu:47 +// CHECK-HOST-ERROR: Error during compilation for host +// CHECK-HOST-ERROR-NOT: Error during compilation for sm_35 ---------------- steven_wu wrote: > tra wrote: > > To make it more robust, I'd add another copy of the last line before > > CHECK-HOST-ERROR: so it would catch device-side errors if they were to > > happen ahead of the host. > > > > Generally speaking, expected behavior is "I want to see an error from one > > compilation only". We don't really care which CUDA compilation phase > > produces it. Perhaps all we need in all test cases is: > > > > ``` > > CHECK: Error during compilation > > CHECK-NOT: Error during compilation > > ``` > > > > This way we don't need to depend on specific phase order. > That will be a design choice for CUDA driver. I have no preference going > either direction. Just let me know so I will update the test case. > > Speaking of "-fsyntax-only", this is another interesting behavior of clang > cuda driver: > ``` > $ clang -x cuda /dev/null -x c /dev/null -ccc-print-phases > 14: input, "/dev/null", c, (host-cuda) > $ clang -fsyntax-only -x cuda /dev/null -x c /dev/null -ccc-print-phases > 9: input, "/dev/null", c > ``` > So depending on if -fsyntax-only is used or not, the c language part can be > either offloading or not offloading. > This is a corner case that the driver behavior will change after this patch. OK. Let's just check for one error only. As for the second, it is, IMO a problem. The file after ```-x c``` should have been treated as plain C input, regardless of -fsyntax-only. It's reproducible in clean clang tree, so it's not due to this patch. https://reviews.llvm.org/D39502 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
