https://github.com/farzonl closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90276
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/bogner approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90276
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/efriedma-quic approved this pull request.
Okay. I mostly just want to make sure the plan isn't "land all the intrinsics
from the RFC, then eventually investigate the constrained intrinsics".
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90276
farzonl wrote:
> > I didn't want the current set of changes to go stale.
>
> How many changes are we talking about here? If it's just the tan() ones,
> that's fine; it probably makes sense to land constrained-tan separately
> anyway.
There are 4 for tan. There will be more for the other
efriedma-quic wrote:
> I didn't want the current set of changes to go stale.
How many changes are we talking about here? If it's just the tan() ones,
that's fine; it probably makes sense to land constrained-tan separately anyway.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90276
farzonl wrote:
> I'm worried if we add a whole new series of math intrinsics without adding
> the corresponding constrained intrinsics, it's going to be confusing for
> anyone trying to understand how math intrinsics work. Why does tan exist, but
> not constrained tan?
>
> `tan` is defined
efriedma-quic wrote:
I'm worried if we add a whole new series of math intrinsics without adding the
corresponding constrained intrinsics, it's going to be confusing for anyone
trying to understand how math intrinsics work. Why does tan exist, but not
constrained tan?
`tan` is defined
farzonl wrote:
Hi @efriedma-quic @RKSimon when you have time could I get a review? Thank you!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90276
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
farzonl wrote:
> Are you intentionally skipping implementing changes to __builtin_tan()?
Yes but, maybe my reasoning isn't good enough to exclude. Let me know. I didn't
add it for two reasons.
First sine and cosine define builtins like so:
```
def SinF16F128 : Builtin, F16F128MathTemplate {
efriedma-quic wrote:
Are you intentionally skipping implementing changes to __builtin_tan()?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90276
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://github.com/hekota approved this pull request.
LGTM!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90276
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-backend-risc-v
Author: Farzon Lotfi (farzonl)
Changes
This change is an implementation of #87367's investigation on
supporting IEEE math operations as intrinsics.
Which was discussed in this RFC:
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-llvm-ir
@llvm/pr-subscribers-backend-x86
Author: Farzon Lotfi (farzonl)
Changes
This change is an implementation of #87367's investigation on
supporting IEEE math operations as intrinsics.
Which was discussed in this RFC:
https://github.com/farzonl ready_for_review
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90276
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/farzonl edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90276
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
15 matches
Mail list logo
