similar to: Strange types on x86 vcvtph2ps and vcvtps2ph intrinsics

I'd like to start a discussion about how clang supports _Float16 for target architectures that don't have direct support for 16-bit floating point arithmetic. The current clang language extensions documentation says, "If half-precision instructions are unavailable, values will be promoted to single-precision, similar to the semantics of __fp16 except that the results will be stored

It seems that there are several issues here: 1. Should the front end be concerned with whether or not the IR that it is emitting can be translated into a well-defined IR? 2. How should the selection DAG handle data types whose representation isn't defined by the ABI we're targeting? 3. What should the ABI do with half-precision floats? Working backward... The third question here is

On 24 Jan 2019, at 4:46, Sjoerd Meijer wrote: > Hello, > > I added _Float16 support to Clang and codegen support in the AArch64 > and ARM backends, but have not looked into x86. Ahmed is right: > AArch64 is fine, only a few ACLE intrinsics are missing. ARM has rough > edges: scalar codegen should be mostly fine, vector codegen needs some > more work. > >

Hi, all: I am trying to test half float point support in llvm, I found clang can generate bitcode for __fp16, while llc can't generate code for it, the error message is like this LLVM ERROR: Cannot select: 0x26a68e0: i16 = fp32_to_fp16 0x26a67d8 [ORD=2] [ID=4] 0x26a67d8: f32,ch = CopyFromReg 0x2693060, 0x26a66d0 [ORD=2] [ID=3] 0x26a66d0: f32 = Register %vreg1 [ID=1] In function: test

I want to generate Haskell bindings to LLVM intrinsics. In a first attempt I wrote a little parser that reads IntrinsicsX86.td and outputs a Haskell module. E.g. the definition def int_x86_avx_max_ps_256 : GCCBuiltin<"__builtin_ia32_maxps256">, Intrinsic<[llvm_v8f32_ty], [llvm_v8f32_ty, llvm_v8f32_ty], [IntrNoMem]>; is turned into

On Mon, 5 Feb 2007, Dan Gohman wrote: > LLVM knows what all the types of the intrinsic functions are; I thought, > why are users (including llvm-gcc...) required to duplicate all this > information in order to use them? I mean in order to call > getOrInsertFunction to get declarations for them. That is an excellent question! :) In the bad old days, we used to allow intrinsics

On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 12:28:56PM -0800, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Mon, 5 Feb 2007, Dan Gohman wrote: > > > LLVM knows what all the types of the intrinsic functions are; I thought, > > why are users (including llvm-gcc...) required to duplicate all this > > information in order to use them? I mean in order to call > > getOrInsertFunction to get declarations for

LLVM knows what all the types of the intrinsic functions are; I thought, why are users (including llvm-gcc...) required to duplicate all this information in order to use them? I mean in order to call getOrInsertFunction to get declarations for them. So I wrote this patch, which allows all this code to be generated automatically. Is this a good approach? Dan -- Dan Gohman, Cray Inc. <djg at