[SYCL] Add spill_memory_size standalone test #17594
Closed
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
kurapov-peter
temporarily deployed
to
WindowsCILock
GitHub Actions
Inactive
kurapov-peter
had a problem deploying
to
WindowsCILock
GitHub Actions
Failure
kurapov-peter
had a problem deploying
to
WindowsCILock
GitHub Actions
Failure
kurapov-peter
temporarily deployed
to
WindowsCILock
GitHub Actions
Inactive
kurapov-peter
temporarily deployed
to
WindowsCILock
GitHub Actions
Inactive
kurapov-peter
temporarily deployed
to
WindowsCILock
GitHub Actions
Inactive
Contributor
Author
|
Closing this in favor of #17657 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This adds a standalone version of the test for the kernel queries extension according to #17593. We already have a similar test in
kernel_info.cpp(added with the implementation #16834), so I'm not sure this is necessary. This one additionally tests for the exception in the case when a device does not have the aspect.T
here is likely a better way of structuring the test though. Should I split it into one requiring the aspect and the other, testing for the exception? Is there a mechanism to require the absence of the aspect?