Clarify the meaning of different device types #727
Conversation
The description of what constitutes a CPU or GPU has always been unclear. This commit adjusts these descriptions to clarify that it is ultimately up to the implementation to decide whether a device is identified as a specific device type. It also attempts to separate normative behaviors (like the connection between device type aspects and info::device_type) from non-normative descriptions of what a device type may mean.
|
Amazing, thanks a lot! I wanted to make those kinds of changes but didn't know how to tackle them. They look nice!
Typos, Should be PS: I will not make any joke about using self-affirming terminology on the SYCL Spec... |
Good catch, thanks!
Since you brought it up... I did wonder if this wording could be problematic, because somebody might think we're trying to make a joke. Maybe:
...would be better? It's arguably more accurate, too, since different implementations may choose to represent the same device in different ways. I'll make that change. |
The previous wording could be read in a way that implied the (hardware) device could somehow declare what its device type should be, which is misleading. It is more accurate to say that the implementation identifies the device as a specific type, since different implementations may choose to identify the same piece of hardware differently.
Look good to me! |
The description of what constitutes a CPU or GPU has always been unclear.
This commit adjusts these descriptions to clarify that it is ultimately up to the implementation to decide whether a device is identified as a specific device type. It also attempts to separate normative behaviors (like the connection between device type aspects and
info::device_type) from non-normative descriptions of what a device type may mean.Closes #7, closes #545.