Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

[SYCL] Return nullptr when allocation size is zero in usm allocator #12765

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Feb 21, 2024
Merged

[SYCL] Return nullptr when allocation size is zero in usm allocator #12765

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 2 commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
1b14c69
Return nullptr when allocation size is zero
uditagarwal97 Feb 20, 2024
454156b
Added test case
uditagarwal97 Feb 20, 2024
2145b66
Fix test case
uditagarwal97 Feb 20, 2024
7f1e0d3
Address reviews
uditagarwal97 Feb 21, 2024
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
3 changes: 3 additions & 0 deletions sycl/include/sycl/usm/usm_allocator.hpp
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -71,6 +71,9 @@ class usm_allocator {
T *allocate(size_t NumberOfElements, const detail::code_location CodeLoc =
detail::code_location::current()) {

if (!NumberOfElements)
return nullptr;

auto Result = reinterpret_cast<T *>(
aligned_alloc(getAlignment(), NumberOfElements * sizeof(value_type),
MDevice, MContext, AllocKind, MPropList, CodeLoc));
Expand Down
25 changes: 25 additions & 0 deletions sycl/test-e2e/USM/usm_allocator_zero_allocation.cpp
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
// RUN: %{build} -o %t.out
// RUN: %{run} %t.out

#include <sycl/sycl.hpp>

using namespace sycl;
#define ALLOC_SIZE 0
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just inline it...


int main() {
queue q;
auto dev = q.get_device();
auto ctxt = q.get_context();

if (dev.get_info<info::device::usm_host_allocations>()) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why do we only test "host" here?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not sure how adding more allocation types will increase the test coverage of this change. Nevertheless, I've expanded the test to also check for zero-sized shared allocations. usm::alloc::device is not supported by usm_allocator so, I've skipped that.

uditagarwal97 marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
sycl::usm_allocator<int, sycl::usm::alloc::host> ua{ctxt, dev};
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Don't we have another overload that accepts queue here? If not, I think the common spelling in our sources is ctx.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Fixed

int *p = ua.allocate(ALLOC_SIZE);

assert(!p && "usm_allocator should return a null pointer when allocation "
"size is zero.");
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'd reword as "our implementation is expected to ...".


ua.deallocate(p, ALLOC_SIZE);
}

return 0;
}
Loading