changpeng wrote:
I am going to propose to rename intrinsics and remove f16/bf16 versions of
builtins/intrinsics
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/86202
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mail
https://github.com/changpeng closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/86202
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
changpeng wrote:
[AMD Official Use Only - General]
I am fine to remove f16/bf16 versions. Enumerating all possible types could be
very painful. For example we gave up enumerating for B64, and ended up using
v2i32 only. What do others think removing f16/bf16 versions? Thanks
Get Outlook for iO
@@ -432,13 +432,15 @@ TARGET_BUILTIN(__builtin_amdgcn_s_wakeup_barrier, "vi",
"n", "gfx12-insts")
TARGET_BUILTIN(__builtin_amdgcn_s_barrier_leave, "b", "n", "gfx12-insts")
TARGET_BUILTIN(__builtin_amdgcn_s_get_barrier_state, "Uii", "n", "gfx12-insts")
-TARGET_BUILTIN(__builti
https://github.com/arsenm approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/86202
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
arsenm wrote:
> > I don't think intrinsics are meant for users. Builtins are the user-facing
> > front. :-)
>
> Depending on who you consider an user. Are folks writing MLIR generators
> users?
They're consumers of an unstable API, changing intrinsics is fine
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-pr
piotrAMD wrote:
The change LG - thanks for adding support for bf16.
Agreed that the intrinsics should match the builtins for consistency (now or in
a follow-up commit).
These intrinsics were added for the upcoming generation - it should be fine to
rename them at this stage.
https://github.com
rampitec wrote:
> I don't think intrinsics are meant for users. Builtins are the user-facing
> front. :-)
Depending on who you consider an user. Are folks writing MLIR generators users?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/86202
___
cfe-commits
changpeng wrote:
> I don't think intrinsics are meant for users. Builtins are the user-facing
> front. :-)
Then renaing the intrinsics should be relatively at a lower priority. We may do
it in a separate patch once we have reached an agreement.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/86202
shiltian wrote:
> > > > Do you want to rename intrinsics as well? Because now intrinsic names
> > > > do not match builtin names.
> > >
> > >
> > > Do we have to match builtins with intrinsics? Renaming intrinsics here
> > > means we will have to duplicate the intrinsics.
> >
> >
> > Is tha
changpeng wrote:
> > > Do you want to rename intrinsics as well? Because now intrinsic names do
> > > not match builtin names.
> >
> >
> > Do we have to match builtins with intrinsics? Renaming intrinsics here
> > means we will have to duplicate the intrinsics.
>
> Is that because of the man
rampitec wrote:
> > Do you want to rename intrinsics as well? Because now intrinsic names do
> > not match builtin names.
>
> Do we have to match builtins with intrinsics? Renaming intrinsics here means
> we will have to duplicate the intrinsics.
Is that because of the mangling?
https://gith
changpeng wrote:
> Do you want to rename intrinsics as well? Because now intrinsic names do not
> match builtin names.
Do we have to match builtins with intrinsics? Renaming intrinsics here means we
will have to duplicate the intrinsics.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/86202
__
@@ -432,13 +432,15 @@ TARGET_BUILTIN(__builtin_amdgcn_s_wakeup_barrier, "vi",
"n", "gfx12-insts")
TARGET_BUILTIN(__builtin_amdgcn_s_barrier_leave, "b", "n", "gfx12-insts")
TARGET_BUILTIN(__builtin_amdgcn_s_get_barrier_state, "Uii", "n", "gfx12-insts")
-TARGET_BUILTIN(__builti
@@ -432,13 +432,15 @@ TARGET_BUILTIN(__builtin_amdgcn_s_wakeup_barrier, "vi",
"n", "gfx12-insts")
TARGET_BUILTIN(__builtin_amdgcn_s_barrier_leave, "b", "n", "gfx12-insts")
TARGET_BUILTIN(__builtin_amdgcn_s_get_barrier_state, "Uii", "n", "gfx12-insts")
-TARGET_BUILTIN(__builti
https://github.com/rampitec commented:
Do you want to rename intrinsics as well? Because now intrinsic names do not
match builtin names.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/86202
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://li
https://github.com/changpeng created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/86202
Make the name of a clang builtin as close to the mnemonic instruction name as
possible. The data type suffix may not be enough to tell what instruction the
builtin is going to produce.
This patch also add
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang-codegen
Author: Changpeng Fang (changpeng)
Changes
Make the name of a clang builtin as close to the mnemonic instruction name as
possible. The data type suffix may not be enough to tell what instruction the
builtin is going to produce.
This p
18 matches
Mail list logo
