On 07/28/2016 07:52 AM, Francisco Jerez wrote: > Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> writes: > >> On 6 June 2016 at 00:02, Vedran Miletić <ved...@miletic.net> wrote: >>> On 06/04/2016 04:18 AM, Francisco Jerez wrote: >>>> >>>> Serge Martin <edb+m...@sigluy.net> writes: >>>> >>>>> From: Vedran Miletić <ved...@miletic.net> >>>>> >>>>> Make sure that a struct argument did not get compiled into a pointer >>>>> type with the byval attribute. If we try to handle the pointer with >>>>> byval, we end up with the pointer size instead of the struct size. >>>>> >>>> Ugh, is that a bug in the code below? How are byval pointers supposed >>>> to be handled here? Exactly as if the argument wasn't a pointer at all >>>> by providing a copy of the pointed-to object as-is in the kernel input >>>> buffer? In that case wouldn't the code below need to pass the correct >>>> size of the pointed-to object as target/api size rather than the size of >>>> the pointer? >>>> >>> >>> Yes, byval+pointer should be handled as there is no pointer at all. >>> >>> I have tried passing the correct size, but IIRC LLVM AMDGPU backend does not >>> generate correct asm for byval+pointer variant. The simple solution is to >>> fail with an assert here unless Clang generates code both Clover and the >>> backend can handle. >>> >> Gents, can anyone confirm if the series is still applicable for master >> or it's been superseded ? >> > Hi Emil, I don't think PATCH 1 is useful, but v1.1 of PATCH 2 still > makes sense. It looks like it's going to need some minor rework though > for it to apply cleanly on master. > >> Thanks >> Emil
Hi Emil, Francisco, Serge, now that PATCH 1 is merged, can we also merge PATCH 2? Thanks, Vedran -- Vedran Miletić vedran.miletic.net _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
