LukeGeeson marked an inline comment as done.
LukeGeeson added inline comments.
================
Comment at: llvm/lib/Target/ARM/ARMInstrNEON.td:4846
+ VDOT<op6, op4, op23, RegTy, Asm, AsmTy, AccumTy, InputTy, OpNode> {
+ let hasNoSchedulingInfo = 1;
+
----------------
dmgreen wrote:
> I don't think that hasNoSchedulingInfo is necessarily the best way to handle
> this. That flag is intended for instructions that will never be scheduled,
> like Pseudo instructions.
>
> If you are running into "Complete Schedule" problems, they might need
> HasMatMulInt8 added to the list of unsupported features instead.
Since there are no 8.6a cpus in llvm that support this extension, the default
behaviour is to use Cortex-A57 scheduling - this also has no notion of 8.6a
matmul.
This falls back to SchedMachineModel in `llvm/lib/Target/ARM/ARMScheduleA57.td`
and in particular UnsupportedFeatures would be a candidate place to put
unsupported features like matmul. I took issue with putting all new extensions
here because there should be a separation of concerns between a particular
scheduling model, and supporting new behaviour (which could go in a generic
catch all location that might be slightly more informative ).
Did you have something in particular in mind?
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D77872/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D77872
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
