diggerlin wrote:
> Do we really want to support only `__builtin_cpu_is` on AIX? It doesn't seem
> like this would achieve the desired goal. Most users will use these builtins
> to test for some capability on the target machine. It almost never really
> matters to a user whether the CPU is a Power10. They are much more likely to
> care about whether the system supports MMA so they can insert calls to MMA
> functions; prefixed instructions so they can add them in inline asm, etc. It
> is not clear to me what goal is achieved by just providing the processor
> identification and not its capabilities.
>
> I think it would be better if (in consultation with the AIX team), we
> determine what it means when the kernel reports that the CPU is for example
> `Power10` and then we emulate `__builtin_cpu_supports` as well based on that.
> For example, a call to `__builtin_cpu_supports("mma")` ends up emitting a
> check for whether the CPU is `Power10` or above.
The patch only support `__builtin_cpu_is`. I will have another two patches to
support the __builtin_cpu_supports() later.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/80069
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
