steven_wu added inline comments.
================ Comment at: test/Driver/cuda-bail-out.cu:47 +// CHECK-HOST-ERROR: Error during compilation for host +// CHECK-HOST-ERROR-NOT: Error during compilation for sm_35 ---------------- tra wrote: > To make it more robust, I'd add another copy of the last line before > CHECK-HOST-ERROR: so it would catch device-side errors if they were to happen > ahead of the host. > > Generally speaking, expected behavior is "I want to see an error from one > compilation only". We don't really care which CUDA compilation phase produces > it. Perhaps all we need in all test cases is: > > ``` > CHECK: Error during compilation > CHECK-NOT: Error during compilation > ``` > > This way we don't need to depend on specific phase order. That will be a design choice for CUDA driver. I have no preference going either direction. Just let me know so I will update the test case. Speaking of "-fsyntax-only", this is another interesting behavior of clang cuda driver: ``` $ clang -x cuda /dev/null -x c /dev/null -ccc-print-phases 14: input, "/dev/null", c, (host-cuda) $ clang -fsyntax-only -x cuda /dev/null -x c /dev/null -ccc-print-phases 9: input, "/dev/null", c ``` So depending on if -fsyntax-only is used or not, the c language part can be either offloading or not offloading. This is a corner case that the driver behavior will change after this patch. https://reviews.llvm.org/D39502 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
