On Tue, 2016-12-06 at 10:52 -0800, Matt Arsenault wrote: > > On Dec 5, 2016, at 12:42, Jan Vesely <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2016-12-05 at 09:48 -0800, [email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]> wrote: > > > From: Matt Arsenault <[email protected]> > > > > > > --- > > > .../execute/negative-private-base-pointer.cl | 120 > > > +++++++++++++++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 120 insertions(+) > > > create mode 100644 > > > tests/cl/program/execute/negative-private-base-pointer.cl > > > > > > diff --git a/tests/cl/program/execute/negative-private-base-pointer.cl > > > b/tests/cl/program/execute/negative-private-base-pointer.cl > > > new file mode 100644 > > > index 0000000..7ee528b > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ b/tests/cl/program/execute/negative-private-base-pointer.cl > > > @@ -0,0 +1,120 @@ > > > +/*! > > > +[config] > > > +name: negative private buffer base index > > > +clc_version_min: 10 > > > +dimensions: 1 > > > + > > > +[test] > > > +kernel_name: read_write_private_base_plus_offset > > > +name: negative base private index > > > +global_size: 1 0 0 > > > + > > > +arg_out: 0 buffer int[16] \ > > > + 0xab \ > > > + 0xbc \ > > > + 0xabcd \ > > > + 0xdead \ > > > + \ > > > + 0xcafe \ > > > + 0xf00d \ > > > + 0xababfeed \ > > > + 0xca00fe \ > > > + \ > > > + 0xb00feed \ > > > + 0xca00fe \ > > > + 0xfeedbeef \ > > > + 0xfe \ > > > + \ > > > + 0xbe00fe \ > > > + 0xabcdef \ > > > + 0xbeef \ > > > + 0xde > > > + > > > + > > > +arg_in: 1 buffer int[16] \ > > > + -1 \ > > > + -1 \ > > > + -4 \ > > > + -4 \ > > > + \ > > > + -3 \ > > > + -4 \ > > > + -2 \ > > > + -115 \ > > > + \ > > > + -109 \ > > > + -1015 \ > > > + -1011 \ > > > + -1020 \ > > > + \ > > > + -1014 \ > > > + -137 \ > > > + -151 \ > > > + -40 > > > + > > > +!*/ > > > + > > > +#if 0 > > > + 0xab \ > > > + 0xbc \ > > > + 0xf00d \ > > > + 0xdead \ > > > + 0xcafe \ > > > + 0xabcd \ > > > + 0xababfeed \ > > > + 0xca00fe \ > > > + 0xb00feed \ > > > + 0xca00fe \ > > > + 0xfeedbeef \ > > > + 0xfe \ > > > + 0xbe00fe \ > > > + 0xabcdef \ > > > + 0xbeef \ > > > + 0xde > > > +#endif > > > + > > > +kernel void read_write_private_base_plus_offset(global int* out, global > > > int* in) > > > +{ > > > + volatile int alloca[16]; > > > > does this need to be volatile? > > > > other than that: > > Reviewed-by: Jan Vesely <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> > > > > Jan > > Yes, otherwise the private memory access will be trivially optimized > out defeating the point of the test
I don't get the trivial part. what would that be optimized to? the indices are using values from input buffer (therefore unknown), so it cannot directly match the constants to corresponding position in out buffer. Jan > > -Matt > _______________________________________________ > Piglit mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Piglit mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit
