stuartarchibald

@Crear12 please could you open a new issue with a minimal working reproducer? Sounds like there's something going wrong in the native threading layer. Many thanks.

RE: > Removal of the max_blocksize property of CUDA GUFuncs. This has always (literally, always) been ignored, so it makes no sense to keep it. From searching the code base,...

> > From searching the code base, this does seems to be the case! Is there any reasonable chance of there being user code that uses it (even though it...

> @stuartarchibald Many thanks for the round of review - I've addressed both comments, so this should be ready for another look. Many thanks, one minor suggestion RE string formatting...

Buildfarm ID: `numba_smoketest_cuda_yaml_189`.

> Buildfarm ID: `numba_smoketest_cuda_yaml_189`. This has not yet completed, but the build job for `win=64, py=3.9, np=1.23, CUDASIM=1, CUDA=11.1` had a "fatal exception" from `File , line 180 in dot`,...

> > Buildfarm ID: `numba_smoketest_cuda_yaml_189`. > > This has not yet completed, but the build job for `win=64, py=3.9, np=1.23, CUDASIM=1, CUDA=11.1` had a "fatal exception" from `File , line...

> > > Buildfarm ID: `numba_smoketest_cuda_yaml_189`. > > > > > > This has not yet completed, but the build job for `win=64, py=3.9, np=1.23, CUDASIM=1, CUDA=11.1` had a "fatal...

> > > > Buildfarm ID: `numba_smoketest_cuda_yaml_189`. > > > > > > > > > This has not yet completed, but the build job for `win=64, py=3.9, np=1.23, CUDASIM=1,...

> > > > > Buildfarm ID: `numba_smoketest_cuda_yaml_189`. > > > > > > > > > > > > This has not yet completed, but the build job for...