Skip to content

Conversation

@rbegam
Copy link
Contributor

@rbegam rbegam commented Apr 21, 2021

Signed-off-by: rbegam [email protected]

@rbegam rbegam requested a review from smaslov-intel as a code owner April 21, 2021 20:16
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We need to cache extensions such that the search is not repeated on each kernel launch

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

can we further update some local "static bool" value such that the map lookup is performed only once?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

sure, that can be done during the initialization. In that case, defining this generic helper function findDriverExtension() won't be necessary anymore in this PR

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why do you think we need to give error in this case?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

would you remove this?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I kept it as it was in Gail's patch. My reason for keeping it is to do an early return and saving the overhead of the next zeDriverGetExtensionProperties call.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

it made sense when it was looking for "global-offset" specifically" but not when it is made a general query

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

removing it.

@rbegam
Copy link
Contributor Author

rbegam commented May 10, 2021

ping @smaslov-intel

Copy link
Contributor

@smaslov-intel smaslov-intel left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@rbegam
Copy link
Contributor Author

rbegam commented May 11, 2021

The pre-commit fail is expected as with this PR the corresponding test (prev marked as XFAIL) is now passing:
http://icl-jenkins.sc.intel.com:8080/blue/organizations/jenkins/SYCL_CI%2Fintel%2FLin%2FLLVM_Test_Suite/detail/LLVM_Test_Suite/4259/pipeline

Unexpectedly Passed Tests (1):
SYCL :: Basic/parallel_for_indexers.cpp

The test needs to be enabled which is done in this PR: intel/llvm-test-suite#261

Local testing shows the test passes with this compiler change and vice versa.

@bader bader requested a review from romanovvlad May 12, 2021 05:26
@vladimirlaz
Copy link
Contributor

Please do not merge the PRs. I have restarted testing to make sure that no regressions introduced.

@bader
Copy link
Contributor

bader commented May 12, 2021

Please do not merge the PRs. I have restarted testing to make sure that no regressions introduced.

Please, let me know when you think we can merge it. I'm also waiting for @romanovvlad to confirm that his comments are addressed.

@vladimirlaz
Copy link
Contributor

Now it is OK to merge. Tests have passed

Copy link
Contributor

@romanovvlad romanovvlad left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Approving to indicate that my minor comment is resolved. Have not reviewed entire patch.

@bader bader merged commit 9ca2f91 into intel:sycl May 12, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants