Anastasia added inline comments.
================ Comment at: lib/Headers/opencl-c.h:16020 +// The macro CLK_NULL_RESERVE_ID refers to an invalid reservation ID. +#define CLK_NULL_RESERVE_ID (__builtin_astype((void *)0, reserve_id_t)) bool __ovld is_valid_reserve_id(reserve_id_t reserve_id); ---------------- echuraev wrote: > yaxunl wrote: > > Anastasia wrote: > > > yaxunl wrote: > > > > Anastasia wrote: > > > > > Looks good from my side. > > > > > > > > > > @yaxunl , since you originally committed this. Could you please > > > > > verify that changing from `SIZE_MAX` to `0` would be fine. > > > > > > > > > > Btw, we have a similar definition for `CLK_NULL_EVENT`. > > > > `__PIPE_RESERVE_ID_VALID_BIT` is implementation detail and not part of > > > > the spec. I would suggest to remove it from this header file. > > > > > > > > The spec only requires CLK_NULL_RESERVE_ID to be defined but does not > > > > define its value. Naturally a valid id starts from 0 and increases. I > > > > don't see significant advantage to change CLK_NULL_RESERVE_ID from > > > > __SIZE_MAX to 0. > > > > > > > > Is there any reason that this change is needed? > > > I don't see issues to commit things outside of spec as soon as they > > > prefixed properly with "__". But I agree it would be nice to see if it's > > > any useful and what the motivation is for having different implementation. > > For `__PIPE_RESERVE_ID_VALID_BIT`, it assumes that the implementation uses > > one specific bit of a reserve id to indicate that the reserve id is valid. > > Not all implementations assume that. Actually I am curious why that is > > needed too. > About `CLK_NULL_RESERVE_ID`: we check that reserve id is valid if significant > bit equal to one. `CLK_NULL_RESERVE_ID refers to an invalid reservation, so > if `CLK_NULL_RESERVE_ID equal to 0, we can be sure that significant bit > doesn't equal to 1 and it is invalid reserve id. Also it is more obviously if > CLK_**NULL**_RESERVE_ID is equal to 0. > > What about `__PIPE_RESERVE_ID_VALID_BIT`: As I understand previous > implementation also assumes that one specific bit was of a reverse id was > used to indicate that the reserve id is valid. So, we just increased reserve > id size by one bit on 32-bit platforms and by 33 bits on 64-bit platforms. It is more logical to me that `CLK_NULL_RESERVE_ID` is 0, but spec doesn't define it of course. https://reviews.llvm.org/D32896 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
