================
@@ -248,8 +250,9 @@ inline constexpr ExtensionInfo Extensions[] = {
{"simd", AArch64::AEK_SIMD, "+neon", "-neon", FEAT_SIMD,
"+fp-armv8,+neon", 100},
{"sm4", AArch64::AEK_SM4, "+sm4", "-sm4", FEAT_SM4,
"+sm4,+fp-armv8,+neon", 60},
{"sme-f16f16", AArch64::AEK_SMEF16F16, "+sme-f16f16", "-sme-f16f16",
FEAT_INIT, "", 0},
- {"sme-f64f64", AArch64::AEK_SMEF64F64, "+sme-f64f64", "-sme-f64f64",
FEAT_SME_F64, "+sme,+sme-f64f64,+bf16", 560},
- {"sme-i16i64", AArch64::AEK_SMEI16I64, "+sme-i16i64", "-sme-i16i64",
FEAT_SME_I64, "+sme,+sme-i16i64,+bf16", 570},
+ {"sme-f64f64", AArch64::AEK_SMEF64F64, "+sme-f64f64", "-sme-f64f64",
FEAT_SME_F64, "+sme,+sme-f64f64,+bf16", 560},
+ {"sme-i16i64", AArch64::AEK_SMEI16I64, "+sme-i16i64", "-sme-i16i64",
FEAT_SME_I64, "+sme,+sme-i16i64,+bf16", 570},
+ {"sme-fa64", AArch64::AEK_SMEFA64, "+sme-fa64", "-sme-fa64",
FEAT_SME_FA64, "+sve2", 580},
----------------
sdesmalen-arm wrote:
I wonder if this has something to do with the order in which it emits the
runtime checks for these target features in the resolver function. I can't
really gauge whether this priority is better or worse than any other though.
Perhaps @ilinpv can give some guidance here?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/70809
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
