[Beignet] Does LLVM 3.6 still hit a bug?

[Rebecca N. Palmer]

When was this workaround done (in particular, is beignet 1.1.1 
affected)?  As the Khronos test suite is non-public, I can't test this 
myself.

Debian have now announced an intention to remove LLVM 3.5 
(https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=803643).

An alternative option (which I haven't tested yet but appears to be 
working in Fedora) would be to apply 27522f9..2af7dea and go straight to 
LLVM 3.7.

On 09/10/15 06:56, Zou, Nanhai wrote:
> It's a bug related to conditional compare.
> The bug will affect the float saturate implementation in Beignet, we have worked around it.
> The bug was exposed by a subcase in Khronos OpenCL conformance test, we will try to isolate the bug to report to llvm.
>
> Thanks
> Zou Nanhai
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Beignet [mailto:beignet-bounces at lists.freedesktop.org] On Behalf Of
>> Rebecca N. Palmer
>> Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2015 1:32 AM
>> To: beignet at lists.freedesktop.org
>> Subject: [Beignet] Does LLVM 3.6 still hit a bug?
>>
>> Debian are planning to switch their default LLVM/Clang to 3.6 soon.  Is it still
>> the case that
>>> The recommended LLVM/CLANG version is 3.5 and/or 3.6. Based on our test
>> result, LLVM 3.5 has best pass rate on all the test suites. Compare to LLVM 3.5,
>> LLVM 3.6 has slightly lower pass rate(caused by one front end bug at clang 3.6)
>> but has better performance (3% to 5% up).
>> (http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/Beignet/)?  Where can I find
>> code to test for this bug (the test suite doesn't)?
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Beignet mailing list
>> Beignet at lists.freedesktop.org
>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/beignet