[PATCH] D133668: [HLSL] Use _BitInt(16) for int16_t to avoid promote to int.

Mon Sep 12 12:20:21 PDT 2022

python3kgae added a comment.

In D133668#3784636 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D133668#3784636>, @python3kgae wrote:

> In D133668#3784607 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D133668#3784607>, @aaron.ballman wrote:
>
>> In D133668#3783975 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D133668#3783975>, @beanz wrote:
>>
>>> In D133668#3783489 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D133668#3783489>, @aaron.ballman wrote:
>>>
>>>> Okay, that's good to know! If you don't intend to *ever* conform to the standard in this area, then I think this approach is very reasonable. But you should know up front that you're constraining yourself here. (Changing the underlying type in the future is an ABI break: https://godbolt.org/z/P6ndrzMab, note the name mangling.)
>>>
>>> We have the benefit of ABI escape hatches. HLSL itself doesn't define a permanently stable ABI since GPU hardware and runtime ABIs change too frequently. We instead revision our ABI every few years as the DirectX and Vulkan specifications evolve.
>>>
>>> My hope is that as the HLSL language and our runtime ABIs evolve we'll be more and more conformant to the C standard, but there are some odd areas that we might never quite get there on.
>>>
>>> The 16-bit integer math is an interesting case. Because GPUs are inherently SIMD machines, on many architectures you can handle twice as many 16-bit operations per instruction as 32-bit (yay vectors!). Combine that with HLSL's SPMD programming model and all scalar math is actually vector math. This makes integer promotion for 16-bit types severely limiting. As a result I don't suspect we'll ever want to conform to C here.
>>
>> Ah, good to know!
>>
>> Btw, it looks like precommit CI is finding failures here.
>
> It is strange that the tests passed locally when CI hit fail in this PR. But in https://reviews.llvm.org/D133634, I hit fail locally while CI passed all tests.
> I'll check and fix local failures I can repro first.

Might be some issue with the stack PR. Should be OK once rebase with https://reviews.llvm.org/D133634.

Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D133668/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D133668