If there are no devices available for testing on liboffload, the test will no longer throw an error when it fails to instantiate. The tests will be silently skipped, but with a warning printed to stderr.
On my system, this will be "Radeon RX 7900 GRE" rather than "gfx1100". For Nvidia, the product name and device name are identical.
All entry points (except olInit) now check that offload has been initialized. If not, a new `OL_ERRC_UNINITIALIZED` error is returned.
Adds a `check-offload-unit` target for running the liboffload unit test suite. This unit test binary runs the tests for every available device. This can optionally filtered to devices from a single platform, but the check target runs on everything. The target is not part of `check-offload` and does not get propagated to the top level build. I'm not sure if either of these things are desirable, but I'm happy to look into it if we want. Also remove the `offload/unittests/Plugins` test as it's dead code and doesn't build.
Implement the complete initial version of the Offload API, to the extent that is usable for simple offloading programs. Tested with a basic SYCL program. As far as possible, these are simple wrappers over existing functionality in the plugins. * Allocating and freeing memory (host, device, shared). * Creating a program * Creating a queue (wrapper over asynchronous stream resource) * Enqueuing memcpy operations * Enqueuing kernel executions * Waiting on (optional) output events from the enqueue operations * Waiting on a queue to finish Objects created with the API have reference counting semantics to handle their lifetime. They are created with an initial reference count of 1, which can be incremented and decremented with retain and release functions. They are freed when their reference count reaches 0. Platform and device objects are not reference counted, as they are expected to persist as long as the library is in use, and it's not meaningful for users to create or destroy them. Tests have been added to `offload.unittests`, including device code for testing program and kernel related functionality. The API should still be considered unstable and it's very likely we will need to change the existing entry points.
Reland #118503. Added a fix for builds with `-DBUILD_SHARED_LIBS=ON` (see last commit). Otherwise the changes are identical. --- ### New API Previous discussions at the LLVM/Offload meeting have brought up the need for a new API for exposing the functionality of the plugins. This change introduces a very small subset of a new API, which is primarily for testing the offload tooling and demonstrating how a new API can fit into the existing code base without being too disruptive. Exact designs for these entry points and future additions can be worked out over time. The new API does however introduce the bare minimum functionality to implement device discovery for Unified Runtime and SYCL. This means that the `urinfo` and `sycl-ls` tools can be used on top of Offload. A (rough) implementation of a Unified Runtime adapter (aka plugin) for Offload is available [here](https://github.com/callumfare/unified-runtime/tree/offload_adapter). Our intention is to maintain this and use it to implement and test Offload API changes with SYCL. ### Demoing the new API ```sh # From the runtime build directory $ ninja LibomptUnitTests $ OFFLOAD_TRACE=1 ./offload/unittests/OffloadAPI/offload.unittests ``` ### Open questions and future work * Only some of the available device info is exposed, and not all the possible device queries needed for SYCL are implemented by the plugins. A sensible next step would be to refactor and extend the existing device info queries in the plugins. The existing info queries are all strings, but the new API introduces the ability to return any arbitrary type. * It may be sensible at some point for the plugins to implement the new API directly, and the higher level code on top of it could be made generic, but this is more of a long-term possibility.
Reverts llvm/llvm-project#118503 Broke bot https://lab.llvm.org/staging/#/builders/131/builds/9701/steps/5/logs/stdio
This is another attempt to reland the changes from #108413 The previous two attempts introduced regressions and were reverted. This PR has been more thoroughly tested with various configurations so shouldn't cause any problems this time. If anyone is aware of any likely remaining problems then please let me know. The changes are identical other than the fixes contained in the last 5 commits. --- ### New API Previous discussions at the LLVM/Offload meeting have brought up the need for a new API for exposing the functionality of the plugins. This change introduces a very small subset of a new API, which is primarily for testing the offload tooling and demonstrating how a new API can fit into the existing code base without being too disruptive. Exact designs for these entry points and future additions can be worked out over time. The new API does however introduce the bare minimum functionality to implement device discovery for Unified Runtime and SYCL. This means that the `urinfo` and `sycl-ls` tools can be used on top of Offload. A (rough) implementation of a Unified Runtime adapter (aka plugin) for Offload is available [here](https://github.com/callumfare/unified-runtime/tree/offload_adapter). Our intention is to maintain this and use it to implement and test Offload API changes with SYCL. ### Demoing the new API ```sh # From the runtime build directory $ ninja LibomptUnitTests $ OFFLOAD_TRACE=1 ./offload/unittests/OffloadAPI/offload.unittests ``` ### Open questions and future work * Only some of the available device info is exposed, and not all the possible device queries needed for SYCL are implemented by the plugins. A sensible next step would be to refactor and extend the existing device info queries in the plugins. The existing info queries are all strings, but the new API introduces the ability to return any arbitrary type. * It may be sensible at some point for the plugins to implement the new API directly, and the higher level code on top of it could be made generic, but this is more of a long-term possibility.
Reverts llvm/llvm-project#117894 Buildbot failures in OpenMP/Offload bots. https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/30/builds/11193
Relands #117704, which relanded changes from #108413 - this was reverted due to build issues. The new offload library did not build with `LIBOMPTARGET_OMPT_SUPPORT` enabled, which was not picked up by pre-merge testing. The last commit contains the fix; everything else is otherwise identical to the approved PR. ___ ### New API Previous discussions at the LLVM/Offload meeting have brought up the need for a new API for exposing the functionality of the plugins. This change introduces a very small subset of a new API, which is primarily for testing the offload tooling and demonstrating how a new API can fit into the existing code base without being too disruptive. Exact designs for these entry points and future additions can be worked out over time. The new API does however introduce the bare minimum functionality to implement device discovery for Unified Runtime and SYCL. This means that the `urinfo` and `sycl-ls` tools can be used on top of Offload. A (rough) implementation of a Unified Runtime adapter (aka plugin) for Offload is available [here](https://github.com/callumfare/unified-runtime/tree/offload_adapter). Our intention is to maintain this and use it to implement and test Offload API changes with SYCL. ### Demoing the new API ```sh # From the runtime build directory $ ninja LibomptUnitTests $ OFFLOAD_TRACE=1 ./offload/unittests/OffloadAPI/offload.unittests ``` ### Open questions and future work * Only some of the available device info is exposed, and not all the possible device queries needed for SYCL are implemented by the plugins. A sensible next step would be to refactor and extend the existing device info queries in the plugins. The existing info queries are all strings, but the new API introduces the ability to return any arbitrary type. * It may be sensible at some point for the plugins to implement the new API directly, and the higher level code on top of it could be made generic, but this is more of a long-term possibility.