[PATCH] D34504: [LLVM][X86][Goldmont] Adding new target-cpu: Goldmont

[Simon Pilgrim via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

RKSimon added a comment.

In https://reviews.llvm.org/D34504#791730, @igorb wrote:

> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D34504#790951, @craig.topper wrote:
>
> > Should we OR in isGLM() every place we use isSLM() today?
> >
> > @zvi or @igorb Should all the places that use isAtom() also include isSLM() and isGLM()? Should isAtom() be renamed to isBonnell()? isAtom sounds like it implies any Atom processor, but it really doesn't.
>
>
> Hello Craig,
>  I think this patch should  focus on functionality only . All performance related issues may be resolved as separate patches following careful study of Intel optimization manual.
>  https://software.intel.com/sites/default/files/managed/9e/bc/64-ia-32-architectures-optimization-manual.pdf


In which case it'd be better not to add the isGLM() and IntelGLM parts of the patch until they are actually needed. As I've already said, we should ideally be trying to get rid of X86ProcFamilyEnum.


https://reviews.llvm.org/D34504