topperc wrote: > I support adding these builtins personally, but I think we need more > discussions on the design. We can achieve the same thing via inline > assemblies, that's true. But, from the compiler side, inline assemblies are > kind of barriers, we can't do a lot of optimizations/reorderings if inline > assemblies exist. If we make it a builtin, these limitations can be loosed I > think.
Inline assembly is only a barrier to moving load/stores and other side effecting instructions. And only if the inline assembly is marked volatile or has "memory" clobber. It should not affect moving arithmetic. I think these CSR intrinsics would also need to be barriers against load/stores and other side effects to be the most conservative to access any CSR. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/85091 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
