I'm in favor of the intrinsic. Pattern matching of code (idiom recognition) is generally a pain.
If we go that route, we should define it in such a way that the two values to multiply are interchangeable, i.e. `fpm(x, y, s)` is same as `fpm(y, x, s)`, i.e. the `x` and `y` are values to multiply and `s` is the shift amount. What I mean specifically is that the original post uses different language to describe `x` and `y` (or `m` in that case), but it should not make any distinction between them. --- [Visit Topic](https://discuss.tvm.ai/t/rfc-using-arm-intrinsics-to-implement-fixed-point-multiplication-in-tvm/7150/7) 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/ca1a6750cab9867857f247cd300c09c1a523f81f4856ad2a3a7f6d46e06a1e46).
