craig.topper added a comment. In D147610#4294247 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D147610#4294247>, @joshua-arch1 wrote:
> I'm wondering whether it is appropriate to just use FPR16 for the destination > of fcvt.bf16.s? The destination is in BF16 format instead of simple FP16. > Your implemention looks like just replacing fcvt.h.s with fcvt.bf16.s. Do we > need to define a new register class? Registers classes only distinguished by the registers in them and what their alignment and spill size are. It doesn't define anything about the format of the register. A BF16 specific register class would be identical in those properties to the FPR16 register class. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D147610/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D147610 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
