<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;"><br><div><div>On Feb 27, 2013, at 6:55 PM, Chandler Carruth <<a href="mailto:chandlerc@google.com">chandlerc@google.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div class="gmail_extra" style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;">Your only objections to what we've said apply equally well to atomic operations. Jeffrey, Owen, and I helped build the motivation document and spec for putting atomics support into the IR. Are you questioning the utility of having atomics modeled in LLVM? Or is there something specific to HLE that you think is questionable?</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"></blockquote></div><br><div>Hi Chandler, </div><div><br></div><div>I am not suggesting to make any changes to LLVM's atomic operations. I think that new features such as HLE should be implemented as intrinsics before they make it into the LLVM IR (selection dag is IR too). I am not convinced that the benefits of the new functionality outweigh the added complexity. </div><div><br></div><div>Nadav </div></body></html>