[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b9caefdc3c28485c834491bce60e658b@smtp.hushmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 23:53:06 +0100
From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Problems on recent AMD driver
On 21 Nov, 2012, at 22:06 , magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> wrote:
> ...but per nvidia whitepapers, the following (which is what I do, and others before me) is recommended for using "pinned" or "page-locked" memory. And it's a mix of the above:
> So in this last example, we map it once and never unmap - and we are *also* using clEnqueueWriteBuffer(). If you only go per the Khronos spec, this seems to violate things. From the spec of clEnqueueMapBuffer: "The behavior of OpenCL function calls that enqueue commands that write or copy to regions of a memory object that are mapped is undefined". Maybe I should ask on the Khronos forum to get this straightened out for certain.
I just did:
http://www.khronos.org/message_boards/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=5523
Let's hope someone who actually has a clue will answer.
magnum
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
