yvvan added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D44426#1042162, @mibintc wrote:
> I added some inline comments. You are using the Intel 18.0 compiler on
> Windows - what version of Visual Studio is in the environment?
Yes, I'm using 18.0
================
Comment at: include/llvm-c/Target.h:25
-#if defined(_MSC_VER) && !defined(inline)
+#if defined(_MSC_VER) && !defined(inline) && !defined(__INTEL_COMPILER)
#define inline __inline
----------------
mibintc wrote:
> I really think all the Intel-compiler bug workarounds should be version
> specific. For example, in the boost.org customizations we have checks like
> this:
> #if defined(__INTEL_COMPILER) && (__INTEL_COMPILER >= 1500)
>
> I believe you are using the most recent Intel compiler, 18.0, which has
> version 1800. Let's assume the bug will either be fixed in our 18.0 compiler
> or in our next compiler which would be numbered 1900, so the check could be
> like this:
> #if defined(__INTEL_COMPILER) && (__INTEL_COMPILER < 1900) // employ the
> workaround for the Intel 18.0 compiler and older
>
> This way the workaround will "disappear" when the bug gets fixed.
>
> For that matter I wonder if it's still necessary to use the workaround for
> the Microsoft compiler?
>
> Thanks for reporting the bug into the Intel forum. If we put a bug workaround
> into LLVM it would be very nice to have the bug reported to the offending
> compiler.
>
This one will probably not be fixed because I was answered that it's the
predicted behavior and that I need not to "#define inline __inline" if I use
intel compiler
I agree though about versions which need to be taken into account
================
Comment at: include/llvm/ADT/BitmaskEnum.h:73
+#ifdef __INTEL_COMPILER
+template <typename E>
----------------
mibintc wrote:
> what problem is being worked around here? I checked your post into the Intel
> compiler forum "enum members are not visible to template specialization" and
> I can observe the bug on our Windows compiler but not our Linux compiler.
it was recently accepted. the issues is that E::LLVM_BITMASK_LARGEST_ENUMERATOR
from line 80 here is always invalid with intel compiler and the whole set of
operator overloads is ignored
at least on Windows :)
================
Comment at: include/llvm/Analysis/AliasAnalysis.h:254
FMRB_OnlyAccessesInaccessibleOrArgMem = FMRL_InaccessibleMem |
- FMRL_ArgumentPointees |
+
static_cast<int>(FMRL_ArgumentPointees) |
static_cast<int>(ModRefInfo::ModRef),
----------------
mibintc wrote:
> is this a necessary workaround for the Intel compiler? It's not pretty.
> Suggest we add the #if around it? Long term i hope this would not be
> necessary.
i'm not sure that adding #if around makes it easier to understand :)
of course I can add it everywhere I append enums with static_cast<int>
================
Comment at: lib/Target/AMDGPU/SIISelLowering.cpp:6131
+#ifndef __INTEL_COMPILER
static_assert(((~(SIInstrFlags::S_NAN |
----------------
mibintc wrote:
> this assesrts with Intel compiler? Or the expression needs to be rewritten
> with static_cast as above?
"needs to be rewritten with static_cast" - correct. it can be done but I was a
bit lazy and statioc_assert does not affect the outcome of build :)
https://reviews.llvm.org/D44426
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
