Re: [PATCH,PTX] Add support for CUDA 9

Hi! On Tue, 27 Feb 2018 15:12:47 +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > On Tue, 27 Feb 2018, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > Given that several users have run into this, is this (trunk r256891) OK > > to commit to open release branches, too. > > Sure. Committed to gcc-7-branch in r258126: commit f0888f1155

Re: [PATCH,PTX] Add support for CUDA 9

On Tue, 27 Feb 2018, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > Hi! > > Given that several users have run into this, is this (trunk r256891) OK > to commit to open release branches, too. Sure. > On Fri, 19 Jan 2018 09:42:08 +0100, Tom de Vries > wrote: > > On 01/19/2018 01:59 AM, Cesar Philippidis wrote: > > >

Re: [PATCH,PTX] Add support for CUDA 9

Hi! Given that several users have run into this, is this (trunk r256891) OK to commit to open release branches, too? On Fri, 19 Jan 2018 09:42:08 +0100, Tom de Vries wrote: > On 01/19/2018 01:59 AM, Cesar Philippidis wrote: > > Here's the updated patch with the changes that you requested. There

Re: [PATCH,PTX] Add support for CUDA 9

On 01/19/2018 01:59 AM, Cesar Philippidis wrote: Here's the updated patch with the changes that you requested. There are no new regressions in trunk. I tested it on my desktop running driver 387.34 on a Pascal GPU. Is this OK for trunk? OK with 'PR target/83790' added to the changelog entry.

Re: [PATCH,PTX] Add support for CUDA 9

On 12/19/2017 04:39 PM, Tom de Vries wrote: > On 12/20/2017 12:25 AM, Cesar Philippidis wrote: >> og7-ptx-cuda9.diff >> >> >> 2017-12-19  Cesar Philippidis  >> >> gcc/ >> * config/nvptx/nvptx.c (output_init_frag): Don't use generic address >> spaces for function labels. >> >> gcc/t

Re: [PATCH,PTX] Add support for CUDA 9

On 01/17/2018 06:29 PM, Cesar Philippidis wrote: Is this patch OK for trunk? You haven't made the changes I've asked for, this is the same patch as before. Thanks, - Tom

Re: [PATCH,PTX] Add support for CUDA 9

On 12/27/2017 01:16 AM, Tom de Vries wrote: > On 12/21/2017 06:19 PM, Cesar Philippidis wrote: >> My test results are somewhat inconsistent. On MG's build servers, there >> are no regressions in CUDA 8. > > Ack. > >> On my laptop, there are fewer regressions >> in CUDA 9, than CUDA 8. > > If th

Re: [PATCH,PTX] Add support for CUDA 9

On 12/21/2017 06:19 PM, Cesar Philippidis wrote: My test results are somewhat inconsistent. On MG's build servers, there are no regressions in CUDA 8. Ack. On my laptop, there are fewer regressions in CUDA 9, than CUDA 8. If the patch causes regressions for either cuda 8 or cuda 9, then th

Re: [PATCH,PTX] Add support for CUDA 9

On 12/20/2017 03:15 PM, Tom de Vries wrote: > On 12/20/2017 11:59 PM, Cesar Philippidis wrote: >> On 12/19/2017 04:39 PM, Tom de Vries wrote: >>> On 12/20/2017 12:25 AM, Cesar Philippidis wrote: In CUDA 9, Nvidia removed support for treating the labels of functions as generic address spac

Re: [PATCH,PTX] Add support for CUDA 9

On 12/20/2017 11:59 PM, Cesar Philippidis wrote: On 12/19/2017 04:39 PM, Tom de Vries wrote: On 12/20/2017 12:25 AM, Cesar Philippidis wrote: In CUDA 9, Nvidia removed support for treating the labels of functions as generic address spaces as part of their PTX 6.0 changes. More specifically,

Re: [PATCH,PTX] Add support for CUDA 9

On 12/19/2017 04:39 PM, Tom de Vries wrote: > On 12/20/2017 12:25 AM, Cesar Philippidis wrote: >> In CUDA 9, Nvidia removed support for treating the labels of functions >> as generic address spaces as part of their PTX 6.0 changes. More >> specifically, >>

Re: [PATCH,PTX] Add support for CUDA 9

On 12/20/2017 12:25 AM, Cesar Philippidis wrote: In CUDA 9, Nvidia removed support for treating the labels of functions as generic address spaces as part of their PTX 6.0 changes. More specifically, :

[PATCH,PTX] Add support for CUDA 9

In CUDA 9, Nvidia removed support for treating the labels of functions as generic address spaces as part of their PTX 6.0 changes. More specifically, : Support for taking address of labels, using lab