This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: OpenACC in GCC - how does it not violate the license?

From: Nathan Sidwell <nathan at acm dot org>
To: Alec Teal <a dot teal at warwick dot ac dot uk>
Cc: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>, GCC <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2013 14:40:51 -0700
Subject: Re: OpenACC in GCC - how does it not violate the license?
Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
References: <52884CE8 dot 2050002 at warwick dot ac dot uk> <52885287 dot 9030202 at redhat dot com>

On 11/16/13 22:22, Jeff Law wrote:

On 11/16/13 21:58, Alec Teal wrote:

Now while great, is this true!? Nvidia (IIRC, this was like a year ago
though) don't even give out the instruction set for their GPUs, can we
have GCC targeting closed things? Also there (must be and is) a Cuda
runtime, wouldn't we need an open runtime to link against?

The various projects looking at supporting OpenACC are, to the best of my
knowledge, targeting PTX, which is a virtual ISA from NVidia which is published.

Correct. PTX is a perfectly well defined architecture, albeit for a virtualmachine. The specification is public. IMHO this is no different to, say,targeting Java byte code.

References:
- OpenACC in GCC - how does it not violate the license?
  - From: Alec Teal
- Re: OpenACC in GCC - how does it not violate the license?
  - From: Jeff Law

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]