Reposted because of two reasons:
First, I realized that the message should contain the
word 'mkoffload.cc' to be clearer.
But the main reason is that I kept changing whether I wanted
to set HSA_XNACK=0 and warn with USM for gfx90{0,6,8} or only
one or not. (In GCC, those default to xnack=no as t
On 29/10/2024 12:10, Tobias Burnus wrote:
Hi Andrew,
Am 29.10.24 um 13:07 schrieb Andrew Stubbs:
On 29/10/2024 11:44, Tobias Burnus wrote:
This somewhat matches what is done in OG13 and in Andrew's patch at
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-June/655951.html
albeit the code is some
Hi Andrew,
Am 29.10.24 um 13:07 schrieb Andrew Stubbs:
On 29/10/2024 11:44, Tobias Burnus wrote:
This somewhat matches what is done in OG13 and in Andrew's patch at
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-June/655951.html
albeit the code is somewhat different.
[For some reasons, this cod
On 29/10/2024 11:44, Tobias Burnus wrote:
While users can set HSA_XNACK themselves, it is much more convenient if
the compiler sets it for them (at least if it is overriddable).
Some systems don't have XNACK, but for those that have it, the somewhat
newisher object code versions support three mo
While users can set HSA_XNACK themselves, it is much more convenient if
the compiler sets it for them (at least if it is overriddable).
Some systems don't have XNACK, but for those that have it, the somewhat
newisher object code versions support three modes: unset (GCC: '-mxnack=any';
supporting
