yaxunl abandoned this revision.
yaxunl added a comment.
We implemented this optimization through some target specific llvm pass.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D36327
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
yaxunl added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36327#840658, @bader wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36327#840616, @yaxunl wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36327#839809, @rjmccall wrote:
> >
> > > Could you just implement this in SimplifyLibCalls? I assume there's some
> >
bader added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36327#840616, @yaxunl wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36327#839809, @rjmccall wrote:
>
> > Could you just implement this in SimplifyLibCalls? I assume there's some
> > way to fill in TargetLibraryInfo appropriately for a platform. Is
yaxunl added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36327#839809, @rjmccall wrote:
> Could you just implement this in SimplifyLibCalls? I assume there's some way
> to fill in TargetLibraryInfo appropriately for a platform. Is that too late
> for your linking requirements?
Both the
rjmccall added a comment.
Could you just implement this in SimplifyLibCalls? I assume there's some way
to fill in TargetLibraryInfo appropriately for a platform. Is that too late
for your linking requirements?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D36327
yaxunl added a comment.
John, do you have any comments? Thanks.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D36327
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
bader added a comment.
@rsmith do you have an opinion on what would be the right place for the kind of
proposed optimization?
It looks like it can be implemented as target independent optimization, acting
only for target with specified properties - in this case target must provide
required
yaxunl added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36327#835634, @Anastasia wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36327#835153, @b-sumner wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36327#834032, @Anastasia wrote:
> >
> > > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36327#833891, @yaxunl wrote:
> > >
> > > >
Anastasia added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36327#835153, @b-sumner wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36327#834032, @Anastasia wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36327#833891, @yaxunl wrote:
> >
> > > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36327#833653, @bader wrote:
> > >
> > > >
b-sumner added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36327#834032, @Anastasia wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36327#833891, @yaxunl wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36327#833653, @bader wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Sam,
> > >
> > > What do you think about implementing this optimization
Anastasia added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36327#833891, @yaxunl wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36327#833653, @bader wrote:
>
> > Hi Sam,
> >
> > What do you think about implementing this optimization in target specific
> > optimization pass? Since size/alignment is saved as
yaxunl added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36327#833653, @bader wrote:
> Hi Sam,
>
> What do you think about implementing this optimization in target specific
> optimization pass? Since size/alignment is saved as function parameter in
> LLVM IR, the optimization can be done in target
bader added a comment.
Hi Sam,
What do you think about implementing this optimization in target specific
optimization pass? Since size/alignment is saved as function parameter in LLVM
IR, the optimization can be done in target specific components w/o adding
additional conditions to generic
yaxunl created this revision.
Herald added a subscriber: tpr.
Currently Clang emits call of __read_pipe_2 or __read_pipe_4 for OpenCL
read_pipe builtin,
with appended type size and alignment arguments, where 2 or 4 indicates the
original
number of arguments.
For certain targets (e.g. amdgpu),
14 matches
Mail list logo
