doru1004 added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/test/OpenMP/target_data_use_device_addr_codegen_ptr.cpp:14
+ {
+ #pragma omp target data use_device_addr(x)
+ {
----------------
ye-luo wrote:
> In my understanding of the spec.
> `map(tofrom:x[0:256])` only maps the memory segment that x points to. x
> itself as a pointer scalar is not mapped.
> use_device_addr(x) should fail to find the map of x scalar.
> 5.2 spec.
> If the list item is not a mapped list item, it is assumed to be accessible on
> the target device.
> To me, it seems just keep &x as it was, in this case &x remains a host
> address.
>
> But in your patch description, it seems treating x differently from a scalar.
>
> I also applied your patch on main and got segfault because the x has a value
> of device address and x[0] fails. This should be the behavior of
> use_device_ptr instead of use_device_addr.
> To me, it seems just keep &x as it was, in this case &x remains a host
> address.
So does this mean that if I do something like this in the target data I should
get different addresses for x:
```
#pragma omp target data use_device_ptr(x)
{
fprintf(stderr, "x: %p\n", __LINE__, x);
}
#pragma omp target data use_device_addr(x)
{
fprintf(stderr, "x: %p\n", __LINE__, x);
}
```
> I also applied your patch on main and got segfault because the x has a value
> of device address and x[0] fails.
That's my fault x[0] was the wrong thing to use actually.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D133694/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D133694
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
