rjmccall added a comment. The kind of tracking that you're doing of convergent operations is one example of a basically limitless set of "taint" analyses, of which half a dozen already exist in LLVM. I object to the idea that an arbitrary number of unrelated tests need to be changed every time somebody invents a new taint analysis. I also object to the idea that frontends have a responsibility to proactively compensate for every new weird target-specific representation change just to get the optimizer to perform standard transformations that fully respect the documented semantics of LLVM IR. The basic problem at the root of convergence analysis — that code layout is essentially part of GPU program semantics because of its impact on GPU thread groups — is in fact a very special property of GPU targets that is not in any way unreasonable to ask those targets to be explicit about.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D69498/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D69498 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
