gandhi21299 marked an inline comment as done.
gandhi21299 added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/test/CodeGenCUDA/fp-atomics-optremarks.cu:10
+
+// GFX90A-CAS: A compare and swap loop was generated for an atomic operation
at system memory scope
+// GFX90A-CAS-LABEL: _Z14atomic_add_casPf
----------------
rampitec wrote:
> gandhi21299 wrote:
> > rampitec wrote:
> > > gandhi21299 wrote:
> > > > rampitec wrote:
> > > > > gandhi21299 wrote:
> > > > > > rampitec wrote:
> > > > > > > Need tests for all scopes.
> > > > > > `__atomic_fetch_add` does not take scope as an argument, how could
> > > > > > I add tests with different scopes?
> > > > > At least in the IR test.
> > > > What do you mean by that?
> > > You need to test all of that. If you cannot write a proper .cu test, then
> > > write an IR test and run llc.
> > Should I discard this test then since the test fp-atomics-remarks-gfx90a.ll
> > already satisfies?
> CU test is still needed. You also need it in the .cl test below.
Alright, I am not sure how I can test for the other scopes though.
================
Comment at: llvm/lib/CodeGen/AtomicExpandPass.cpp:585
+ TLI->shouldExpandAtomicRMWInIR(AI, ORE);
+ OptimizationRemark Remark(DEBUG_TYPE, "Passed", AI->getFunction());
+ switch (Kind) {
----------------
rampitec wrote:
> What should this "Passed" do and why wouldn't just declare it where you use
> it?
https://llvm.org/docs/Remarks.html
Since this is an informative pass and not that pass failed to optimize, the
"Passed" argument is used. I will move it downwards, I thought it might be
useful in the future for other operations. Its better below for now anyways.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D106891/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D106891
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
