KhronosGroup / KhronosGroup/OpenCL-CLHPP
Assessment of the difficulty in porting CPU architecture for OpenCL-CLHPP
- Dominant language
- C++
- Stars
- 425
- Forks
- 133
- Avg merge
- 3h 30m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 1
Description
Hello everyone! I am working on implementing a tool to assess the complexity of CPU architecture porting. It primarily focuses on RISC-V architecture porting. In fact, the tool may have an average estimate of various architecture porting efforts.My focus is on the overall workload and difficulty of transplantation in the past and future,even if a project has already been ported.As part of my dataset, I have collected the **OpenCL-CLHPP** project. **I would like to gather community opinions to support my assessment. I appreciate your help and response!** Based on scanning tools, the porting complexity is determined to be simple, with a small amount of code related to the CPU architecture in the project. Is this assessment accurate?Do you have any opinions on personnel allocation and consumption time? I look forward to your help and response.
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
Research direction
The issue names no files, tests, or entry points and requests community opinions rather than a repository change. Start by reviewing the OpenCL-CLHPP project scope and identifying any architecture-dependent areas, then document a justified porting-complexity assessment and supporting evidence as the definition of done.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- cpp
- Domain
- hpc
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 15/100