search for: mattdr

On 9/12/19 5:06 AM, David Zarzycki via llvm-dev wrote: I think adding a builtin to force CMOV or similar instructions on other architectures is long overdue. It’s generally useful, even if one isn’t mitigating speculative execution. I believe that you can currently get this effect using __builtin_unpredictable in Clang. __builtin_unpredictable wasn't added for this purpose, and it's a

...raphy. There are a lot of optimizations that I think will undo this.... > > Sadly, I don't think we have any builtins that I think are reliable in this way. I agree this is a critically important thing, but it isn't as simple as exposing cmov IMO. > > +Matthew Riley <mailto:mattdr at google.com> on my team is actually hoping to start working on getting a real data-invariant programming model moving for C++ and part of that will involve adding support to LLVM as well, so I suspect he'd be interested in this topic as well. Not sure what the timelines on any of our lpans...

Hi everyone, I followed up with some folks at Google about how we wanted to be involved in this group and we decided that Matthew Riley (mattdr at google.com) would be the right person to be involved here. Sorry about the confusion. I'd like to withdraw my request. Thanks again to everyone involved! I'm glad to see this becoming a part of how LLVM works. :) Zola Bridges On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 4:52 PM Zola Bridges <zbrid at...

Thanks Zola, I’d rather have point-contact people, instead of having mailing lists. I have a few goals with this: Listing particular people makes it clear who’s on the hook from your organization These people can still communicate internally, but are responsible to ensure that the internal folks know what the LLVM process and disclosure restrictions are Listing a limited number of specific people