Details
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rL LLVM
Event Timeline
From a target-independent viewpoint I don't see anything wrong here, but I can't say anything about the X86-specific stuff.
James
Hi Simon,
Just asking, since I haven’t followed the previous related patches: Aren’t we regressing AVX512 by removing matchIntegerMINMAX?
More generally, does the generic code produce as many MIN/MAX patterns as this target specific one?
Thanks,
-Quentin
Just asking, since I haven’t followed the previous related patches: Aren’t we regressing AVX512 by removing matchIntegerMINMAX?
More generally, does the generic code produce as many MIN/MAX patterns as this target specific one?
Before this patch I'll put in some more thorough min max tests to ensure that we don't (there might be a few AVX512 cases that aren't been declared legal yet). I was intending to do this when I added constant folding support anyway.