cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Archives Discussions

spectral
Adept II

Question about SDK 2.3 ?

Hi,

 

I have see on the roadmap that you will include some "C++" features in the C kernels (device side) ?

But it is not part of OpenCL 1.1 ? Right ?

If that's true, then I think that it is not very good because  you allow peoples to write OpenCL code that is not portable ?

Please tell me ?

0 Likes
11 Replies
Ceq
Journeyman III

It is true that the OpenCL 1.1 standard does not support C++ features within kernel code. However I wouldn't worry too much about the portability issue since probably only a few features will be included, like overloading, templates and simple classes. This features may greatly reduce the programming effort in some circumstances, but it isn't really full C++, so using something like preprocessor it may be possible to translate into normal C kernels. On the other hand, maybe C++ is a planned extension for future OpenCL releases. Last, another reason to support it may be to offer a complete language to port CUDA code (which supports many C++ features) with minimal effort.

0 Likes

I understand your point of view, but then the problem will be the same than with 'javascript'.

At the begining they have slowly add 'specific' features in each browser.

At the end, when you develop complex Javascript you have to take care about each implementation details, API etc... and it become the HELL to debug and to be portable ! Except if you do basic stuffs ! Then, OpenCL will not be so 'Open' but 'SpecificCL' 😞

It is just a question of quality for long time.

It is why I think that it will be better to do the Specification of 1.2 with C++ support and then implement it ! Or, request an "OpenCL1.1 C++ Language extension specification" addendum !!!

It is always possible to avoid C++, even if this feature is very useful !

 

Regards

0 Likes
bubu
Adept II

Originally posted by: viewon01

 

 

But it is not part of OpenCL 1.1 ? Right ?

 

Not a problem. They can use an extension over the language and wait for the official 2.0 spec meanwhile... But, yep, that won't be optimal for portability.... unless the extension is multivendor-based or "ARBed".

 

0 Likes

well you can look at OpenGL. there is ton of extension from both AMD and nVidia. an there is core specification which must support. you get core openCL which is portable and extension which aren't. it is up to you if you want use them.

0 Likes

When is v2.3 supposed to come out?

I hope I don't need a HD 69x0 for the extensions...

0 Likes

sarobi,

You can expect the v2.3 SDK to be released in a couple of weeks.

What extensions are you interested in?

0 Likes

Hi himanshu.gautam,

I don't want to repeat between posts but how do you think about ideas expressed in this post:

http://forums.amd.com/devforum/messageview.cfm?catid=390&threadid=141840&enterthread=y

can you please evaluate support for some of them?

Thanks.



0 Likes

Originally posted by: himanshu.gautam sarobi,

 

You can expect the v2.3 SDK to be released in a couple of weeks.

 

What extensions are you interested in?

 

I was hoping for some CUDA C++ like features, nothing in particular.

0 Likes

Will 2.3 fix problem with multiple gpu kernel serialization on linux?

0 Likes

It would be very neat if CAL would be made threadsafe in a manner, that multi-gpu usage would be solved without the need of any third-party paralellization utility.

I myself learned MPI, but it is criminally bad and resource consuming. OpenCL events would be a lot more suitable for synchronizing kernel calls and program flow.

0 Likes

Originally posted by: himanshu.gautam

You can expect the v2.3 SDK to be released in a couple of weeks.



more than two weeks have passed. any news about the release of stream sdk 2.3?

thanks

0 Likes