search for: d15471

On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 1:24 AM, Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: > Patch posted for review: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15471 Looking at the patch, I think we should do FP only for now as vectors have extra complexities which IMO warrant more discussion. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20151212/7a61bdef/attachment.ht...

...5 at 11:46 AM, Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: > > > On 12/12/2015 01:44 PM, JF Bastien wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 1:24 AM, Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com> > wrote: > >> Patch posted for review: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15471 > > > Looking at the patch, I think we should do FP only for now as vectors have > extra complexities which IMO warrant more discussion. > > I'm fine with splitting the patch up to make progress. I'll post a split > patch shortly. > Thanks. FWIW I think we'll w...

We've relaxed `atomicrmw xchg` to support floating point types but not cmpxchg -- the cmpxchg comparison behavior is not a floating point comparison, so that would be potentially misleading. I'd say adding the assertion is a good idea. Cheers, Nicolai On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 10:59 PM Chris Lattner via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Does the code generator

Currently, we limit atomic loads and stores to either pointer or integer types. I would like to propose that we extend this to allow both floating point and vector types which meet the other requirements. (i.e. power-of-two multiple of 8 bits, and aligned) This will enable a couple of follow on changes: 1) Teaching the vectorizer how to vectorize unordered atomic loads and stores 2)