Alexey Sachkov
Alexey Sachkov
> Are we allowed to discard a requirement just because they are contradictory? From https://intel.github.io/llvm-docs/design/OptionalDeviceFeatures.html: > > > For a kernel that is decorated with the [[sycl::reqd_work_group_size(W)]] or [[sycl::reqd_sub_group_size(S)]] attribute,...
Ideally, we should never have a need to disable a test on a particular kind of device, because all optional functionality should be checked through aspects. However, there could be...
This should be addressed by #13976
Hi @BenBrock, > C++ modules do not seem to currently work with intel/llvm when SYCL is used. I'm curious if this is likely to be added in the near future,...
At least for builds made from intel/llvm sources, list of available targets and more detailed documentation for the `-fsycl-targets` can be found in our [User Manual](https://github.com/intel/llvm/blob/sycl/sycl/doc/UsersManual.md#generic-options) > Does it make...
I think that the documentation part of the question can be considered resolved. I've outlined the request to add a way to display all possible targets through a flag into...
Tagging @Pennycook, @mkinsner, @GarveyJoe and @bashbaug for additional inputs here
Tagging @vladimirlaz to answer the question
Considering that USM is now a core part of SYCL 2020, any remaining questions about it should be discussed in [KhronosGroup/SYCL-Docs](https://github.com/KhronosGroup/SYCL-Docs) repo.
This is caused by our integration footer implementation: we append a piece of code at the end of user-provided input and we are doing this though creating a temporary file....