I think there is still value of JIT to be present, as a lot of our current examples depend on it. Another way to think about it is that llvm itself is a target, and we happened to have a JIT engine locally for that target.
We can discuss the alternatives, for example, introduce an llvmjit target that directly corresponds to the jit for local environment runtime. You are indeed right that the llvm target is cpu specific, we could consider rename it to llvmcpu. Would love to hear others' thought about what is the best naming scheme. --- [Visit Topic](https://discuss.tvm.ai/t/rfc-tvm-target-specification/6844/28) to respond. You are receiving this because you enabled mailing list mode. To unsubscribe from these emails, [click here](https://discuss.tvm.ai/email/unsubscribe/0f8e3d01a1aec5e71f2ee12ccd37c7a782a0baf6fb9e4f0151a9e7bfbdb65def).
