Rename vfredsum and vfwredsum to vfredusum and vfwredusum. Add aliases for vfredsum and vfwredsum.
Details
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rG LLVM Github Monorepo
Event Timeline
llvm/test/CodeGen/RISCV/rvv/vfredusum-rv32.ll | ||
---|---|---|
1 ↗ | (On Diff #357488) | Just to check - was this renaming done with git mv? Phabricator suggests that vfredsum-rv32.ll was deleted and this was added, which would be worse for the git history. It might be a phabricator quirk, though. |
llvm/test/CodeGen/RISCV/rvv/vfredusum-rv32.ll | ||
---|---|---|
1 ↗ | (On Diff #357488) | AFAIK git mv doesn't do anything in particular to track renames. File renames are automatically detected based on the added and removed content, which means that if there are also changes to the content that detection might fail, and here the instruction renames did cause a lot of changes. |
llvm/lib/Target/RISCV/RISCVInstrInfoV.td | ||
---|---|---|
10 | Do we need to update 0.10 to 1.0-rc? |
llvm/lib/Target/RISCV/RISCVInstrInfoV.td | ||
---|---|---|
10 | Maybe update it after finishing all changes in 1.0-rc? |
llvm/lib/Target/RISCV/RISCVInstrInfoV.td | ||
---|---|---|
10 |
Yes. The other questions like how do you encode rc1 in march or predefined architecture extension macro. @luismarques @frasercrmck @craig.topper @HsiangKai What do you think? |
llvm/lib/Target/RISCV/RISCVInstrInfoV.td | ||
---|---|---|
10 | Maybe we can discuss in the call today, but my initial thoughts would be to just say 1.0 for the reasons you specified. Perhaps there's already precedent in dealing with release-candidate specs for the base ISA or other extensions? |
llvm/test/MC/RISCV/rvv/aliases.s | ||
---|---|---|
86 | I guess you want to verify vfredsum.vs and vfwredsum.vs here? |
llvm/lib/Target/RISCV/RISCVInstrInfoV.td | ||
---|---|---|
10 | I expect v1.0-rc1 will have no big change, especially for these renaming issues. I vote for 1.0 for the experimental extension. |
llvm/test/MC/RISCV/rvv/aliases.s | ||
---|---|---|
86 | Yes, but because the Emit of the InstAlias is set to 0, the printing priority of alias is lower than instruction, It just print the mnemonic of the instruction. |
llvm/test/MC/RISCV/rvv/aliases.s | ||
---|---|---|
86 | Don't you want to use the alias vfredsum.vs as input and verify you get the non-alias vfredusum.vs back? |
llvm/test/MC/RISCV/rvv/aliases.s | ||
---|---|---|
86 | Yes, you are right, I do not notice using wrong input, thank you. |
Sorry, I can't find if we wrote it down in some other patch -- and someone can correct me if I'm wrong -- but in one of the recent LLVM RISC-V sync-up calls we agreed that we'd skip v0.10-rc and move straight to supporting v1.0 when it's made final. So I think this patch will probably have to wait for that.
Thanks for bringing it up - I've lost track of the various 1.0 patches.
This one LGTM from what I can tell.
This patch as committed, deleted 5 test files instead of renaming them. I'm working on restoring them.
Do we need to update 0.10 to 1.0-rc?
If the answer is yes, I think maybe we also need to update the clang part (ex. arch parsing, predefine macro) in follow-up patches.