Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
[SYCL][Docs] Update sycl_ext_intel_usm_address_spaces and fix ctors #7680
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[SYCL][Docs] Update sycl_ext_intel_usm_address_spaces and fix ctors #7680
Changes from 1 commit
f250079
5697fef
f059872
3a7c22e
36c5a95
0e6458e
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Clarify which namespace these are in. I think they are currently in
sycl
, but that's not the right place. They should either be insycl::ext::intel
orsycl::ext::intel::experimental
, depending on the status of this extension.I think we should deprecate the existing aliases and add new ones in the correct namespace.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Currently it is in the
sycl
namespace, but I agree they should be moved. Should we also addraw_
anddecorated_
variants while we are in here? @GarveyJoe - Are you okay if we just move them or would you prefer we keep the old ones in thesycl
namespace as deprecated for now?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Please keep the old ones working with deprecation warnings for now so that we can migrate gradually. FYI, @ajaykumarkannan
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I have added a deprecation warning to the
sycl::{device|host}_ptr
aliases, but it seems that clang isn't handling deprecations of templated aliases correctly at the moment, so users won't be told until that is fixed.The new pointer aliases are:
sycl::ext::intel::device_ptr
sycl::ext::intel::raw_device_ptr
sycl::ext::intel::decorated_device_ptr
sycl::ext::intel::host_ptr
sycl::ext::intel::raw_host_ptr
sycl::ext::intel::decorated_host_ptr
following the same definitions as other pointer aliases with similar naming in SYCL 2020.
This file was deleted.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is this extension is only enabled if the user defines this macro? That isn't consistent with other extensions and it isn't documented in the extension specification.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
My understanding is that if this isn't defined it will just use the same address space qualifier as for
global_space
, so the extension is still supported but does not have much of an effect.