bogner wrote: > Your description and the bug you are adressing make sense. One point of > confusion I see now is our mapping of intrinsics to DXIL Ops. The intrinsics > still all use `LLVMType`. Is that going to be problem?
I don't see why it would. LLVMType is perfectly reasonable for describing LLVM intrinsics. DXIL ops, on the other hand, use a number of specific `dx.types.*` struct types that aren't easy to describe with LLVMType and it wouldn't make sense to extend it to do so. Also, there are far fewer types that come up with DXIL ops, so the full flexibility of LLVMType isn't needed, hence this simpler approach. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/104247 _______________________________________________ llvm-branch-commits mailing list llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
