search for: apply_mask

This thread is already churning, so I apologize if by being late to the party I have missed important information. The "apply_mask" approach is very familiar to me, in that I spent a lot of time thinking about how masking could be added pervasively to LLVM without disrupting the currently nice property that most of the standard arithmetic instructions are "overloaded" to work on all types. The space of options...

On Tuesday 05 August 2008 13:27, David Greene wrote: > Neither solution eliminates the need for instcombine to be careful and > consult masks from time to time. > > Perhaps I'm totally missing something. Concrete examples would be helpful. Ok, so I took my own advice and thought about CSE and instcombine a bit. I wrote the code by hand in a sort of pseudo-llvm language, so

Simon Moll <moll at cs.uni-saarland.de> writes: >> How will existing passes be taught about the new intrinsics? For >> example, what would have to be done to instcombine to teach it about >> these intrinsics? Let's suppose every existing operation had an >> equivalent masked intrinsic. Would it be easier to teach all of the >> passes about them or would