lebedev.ri added a comment. In D67661#1673918 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D67661#1673918>, @s.egerton wrote:
> Sorry I misread your original comment. (which one?) > These functions exist so that we can guarantee that these particular > instructions will be emitted; Sure, that makes sense. > the other option was LLVM IR intrinsics and Clang builtins, this was the > other patch (https://reviews.llvm.org/D66479). > We are planning on abandoning that patch in favour of this one after the > discussions on the patch and the mailing list. I sure did comment that both of these approaches (emitting inline asm, or having arch-specific intrinsics) are worse than emitting plain IR (as there is no 'real' incentive to enhance backend pattern-matching), but arch-specific intrinsics are certainly better than inline asm. Sorry if that thought got convoluted. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D67661/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D67661 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
