FreddyYe added a subscriber: RKSimon. FreddyYe added a comment. As mentioned before:
In D108422#2957528 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D108422#2957528>, @RKSimon wrote: > There's nothing later than CannonLake here - does Intel need to at least > reference up to Tiger/Rocketlake? I met some issues to discuss with you. 1. The feature list now I added is got from the output of -march=XXX. This version should work right with many cpus added above. But some of them don't(Functional issue). I dig a little and found it's caused beyond this table. And the issue already exists in the old CPU added before. For example, "core_i7_sse4_2" and "goldmont" only has one feature differs: which is "movbe", but "movebe" is not included in the table of __cpu_features in libgcc (The table is the same as the one in compiler-rt, which is `enum ProcessorFeatures`), so these two CPU_SPECIFIC won't be classified on run time. 2. Naming convention issue. `-march=goldmont-plus` v.s `cpu_specific(goldmont_plus)`. From my test, CPU_SPECIFIC probably needs other changes to support "goldmont-plus". 3. We probably need to document somewhere for all the supported CPU names on this function multiversioning. 4. CPU_SPECIFIC_ALIAS() issue. For now, CPUs defined by CPU_SPECIFIC_ALIAS is not allowed to used together with original CPU(e.g. `__attribute__((cpu_specific(sandybridge)))` and `__attribute__((cpu_specific(core_2nd_gen_avx)))`), which introduces compile error. Not sure if it is expected. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D111778/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D111778 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
