This is an archive of the discontinued LLVM Phabricator instance.

[AMDGPU] Avoid mentioning GFX10 unnecessarily in docs
AbandonedPublic

Authored by foad on Jan 25 2021, 9:52 AM.

Details

Reviewers
rampitec
t-tye
Summary

In the text refer to e.g. "GFX8+" instead of "GFX8-GFX10". Change a
couple of internal table names to avoid mentioning GFX numbers
altogether where it didn't disambiguate anything.

The intent is to reduce the number of mechanical changes required every
time the document is updated for a new architecture.

Diff Detail

Event Timeline

foad created this revision.Jan 25 2021, 9:52 AM
foad requested review of this revision.Jan 25 2021, 9:52 AM
Herald added a project: Restricted Project. · View Herald TranscriptJan 25 2021, 9:52 AM
t-tye requested changes to this revision.Jan 25 2021, 5:14 PM

A concern I have is that we do not know if future hardware will match what previous hardware is doing. By explicitly stating the range of targets it is clear that the document is saying nothing about future hardware. For example, do you know that future hardware will have the same layout for compute_pgm_rsrc3 register? Or the memory model will be the same? If new hardware comes along I think it is better to simply search for the gfx10 and decide what to do. That seems less error prone than searching for '+'.

llvm/docs/AMDGPUUsage.rst
4105

The title says GFX10 so the label should also have gfx10 in the name.

This revision now requires changes to proceed.Jan 25 2021, 5:14 PM
foad abandoned this revision.Jan 25 2021, 11:17 PM