Skip to content
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][libclc][E2E] atomic work_item scope fallback #16172

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: sycl
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

Seanst98
Copy link
Contributor

Add Invocation case, that falls back to a coarser grained scope, to libclc atomic functions. This prevents hangs on AMD and crashes on NVIDIA when using atomic_ref functionality with work_item scope.

Add a test which simply checks that the kernel does not crash when using atomic_ref with work_item scope.

See issue: #16037

Add Invocation case, that falls back to a coarser grained scope, to
libclc atomic functions. This prevents hangs on AMD and crashes on
NVIDIA when using atomic_ref functionality with work_item scope.

Add a test which simply checks that the kernel does not crash when
using atomic_ref with work_item scope.

See issue: intel#16037
try {

// Allocate device memory
int *data = sycl::malloc_device<int>(1, q);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This needs to be free'ed properly.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good catch. Fixed.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Fixed.

That's why I dislike this part of the SYCL - no RAII for USM :(

Is that common for other e2e tests to "leak" USM on exceptions?

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.

2 participants