Jan Vesely writes:
> On Sun, 2014-10-12 at 01:56 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
>> >[...]
>> None in this case other than I tend to avoid switch-case statements
>> instinctively for some reason. But detecting missing cases during
>> compile time sounds good, I've changed it to a switch.
>
> I thi
On Sun, 2014-10-12 at 01:56 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
> Jan Vesely writes:
>
> > On Sat, 2014-10-11 at 12:47 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
> >> Jan Vesely writes:
> >>
> >> > On Wed, 2014-10-08 at 18:02 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
> >> >> Jan Vesely writes:
> >> >>
> >> >> > [SNIP]
> >>
On Sun, 2014-10-12 at 01:56 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
> Jan Vesely writes:
>
> > On Sat, 2014-10-11 at 12:47 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
> >> Jan Vesely writes:
> >>
> >> > On Wed, 2014-10-08 at 18:02 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
> >> >> Jan Vesely writes:
> >> >>
> >> >> > [SNIP]
> >>
Jan Vesely writes:
> On Sat, 2014-10-11 at 12:47 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
>> Jan Vesely writes:
>>
>> > On Wed, 2014-10-08 at 18:02 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
>> >> Jan Vesely writes:
>> >>
>> >> > [SNIP]
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > I also don't like that this way there is no difference
On Sat, 2014-10-11 at 12:47 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
> Jan Vesely writes:
>
> > On Wed, 2014-10-08 at 18:02 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
> >> Jan Vesely writes:
> >>
> >> > [SNIP]
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > I also don't like that this way there is no difference between
> >> >> > > explicit an
Jan Vesely writes:
> On Wed, 2014-10-08 at 18:02 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
>> Jan Vesely writes:
>>
>> > [SNIP]
>> >> >
>> >> > > I also don't like that this way there is no difference between
>> >> > > explicit and implicit kernel arguments. On the other hand it's simple,
>> >> > > and do
On Wed, 2014-10-08 at 18:02 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
> Jan Vesely writes:
>
> > [SNIP]
> >> >
> >> > > I also don't like that this way there is no difference between
> >> > > explicit and implicit kernel arguments. On the other hand it's simple,
> >> > > and does not need additional per dri
Jan Vesely writes:
> [SNIP]
>> >
>> > > I also don't like that this way there is no difference between
>> > > explicit and implicit kernel arguments. On the other hand it's simple,
>> > > and does not need additional per driver code.
>> > >
>> > Yeah... We definitely want to hide these from the
[SNIP]
> >
> > > I also don't like that this way there is no difference between
> > > explicit and implicit kernel arguments. On the other hand it's simple,
> > > and does not need additional per driver code.
> > >
> > Yeah... We definitely want to hide these from the user, as e.g. the
> > CL_KER
On Tue, 2014-09-02 at 15:36 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
> Jan Vesely writes:
>
> > On Sat, 2014-08-16 at 13:13 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
> >> Jan Vesely writes:
> >>
> >> > On Thu, 2014-08-07 at 16:02 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
> >> >> Jan Vesely writes:
> >> >>
> >> >> > This respin
Jan Vesely writes:
> On Sat, 2014-08-16 at 13:13 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
>> Jan Vesely writes:
>>
>> > On Thu, 2014-08-07 at 16:02 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
>> >> Jan Vesely writes:
>> >>
>> >> > This respin includes Francisco's approach of providing implicit
>> >> > in the arg vect
On Sat, 2014-08-16 at 13:13 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
> Jan Vesely writes:
>
> > On Thu, 2014-08-07 at 16:02 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
> >> Jan Vesely writes:
> >>
> >> > This respin includes Francisco's approach of providing implicit
> >> > in the arg vector passed from clover, and Tom
Jan Vesely writes:
> On Thu, 2014-08-07 at 16:02 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
>> Jan Vesely writes:
>>
>> > This respin includes Francisco's approach of providing implicit
>> > in the arg vector passed from clover, and Tom's idea of appending
>> > implicit args after the kernel args.
>> >
>>
On Thu, 2014-08-07 at 16:02 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
> Jan Vesely writes:
>
> > This respin includes Francisco's approach of providing implicit
> > in the arg vector passed from clover, and Tom's idea of appending
> > implicit args after the kernel args.
> >
>
> Hmmm... Maybe it would make
Tom Stellard writes:
> On Thu, Aug 07, 2014 at 04:02:40PM +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
>> Jan Vesely writes:
>>
>> > This respin includes Francisco's approach of providing implicit
>> > in the arg vector passed from clover, and Tom's idea of appending
>> > implicit args after the kernel args.
On Thu, Aug 07, 2014 at 04:02:40PM +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
> Jan Vesely writes:
>
> > This respin includes Francisco's approach of providing implicit
> > in the arg vector passed from clover, and Tom's idea of appending
> > implicit args after the kernel args.
> >
>
> Hmmm... Maybe it wou
Jan Vesely writes:
> This respin includes Francisco's approach of providing implicit
> in the arg vector passed from clover, and Tom's idea of appending
> implicit args after the kernel args.
>
Hmmm... Maybe it would make sense to add some sort of versioning
(e.g. as part of the target triple)
This respin includes Francisco's approach of providing implicit
in the arg vector passed from clover, and Tom's idea of appending
implicit args after the kernel args.
I assumed it's not safe to modify exec.input, so the input vector is copied
before appending work dim.
Passes get-work-dim piglit
18 matches
Mail list logo
