[llvm-dev] X86 backend code ownership

[Michael Kuperstein via llvm-dev]

+1

On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 7:15 AM, Sanjay Patel via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> +1 - especially since I think Craig convinced Intel that LLVM isn't just a
> hobby project for him. :)
>
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 5:08 AM, Andrea Di Biagio via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> Fwiw, I also think that Craig would be a good code owner. So, my +1 goes
>> to him :-)
>>
>> @Nadav, thanks again for all your kind help and contributions to the x86
>> backend!
>>
>> -Andrea
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 3:20 AM, Craig Topper via llvm-dev <
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for the support Nadav, Zvi, Chandler, Renato, and anyone else I
>>> missed.
>>>
>>> Quetin, to maybe address your concerns. My focus lately has been fixing
>>> inconsistency in instruction selection behavior between the older AVX
>>> instruction encodings and the new AVX512 encodings. I've also been trying
>>> to fix cases where concepts haven't been extended to wider vectors yet. For
>>> instance, the instcombine handling of x86 shift intrinsics. I've also been
>>> trying to remove AVX512 intrinsics for things that can be represented with
>>> native IR or where we can use a legacy instrinsic and only need a masking
>>> IR select instruction to support AVX512.
>>>
>>> ~Craig
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 5:38 PM, Quentin Colombet via llvm-dev <
>>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Copy/pasting my concerns here to ease the reading:
>>>> Craig is indeed one of the main contributor of the X86 backend (in
>>>> terms of commits). My concern though is that Craig’s focus is on the
>>>> assembly (TableGen classes clean-up and such) and not so much on CodeGen
>>>> (ISel and various X86-specific passes) as far as I can tell.
>>>>
>>>> > On Nov 9, 2016, at 5:11 PM, Nadav Rotem via llvm-dev <
>>>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > Hi,
>>>> >
>>>> > I'd like to continue the discussion on the X86 backend ownership that
>>>> started here [1].  I think that Craig Topper would be a great code owner.
>>>> Several people replied to the email with +1s. Quentin had some concerns.
>>>> Let's continue the discussion.
>>>> >
>>>> > -Nadav
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > [1] - http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2016-November/10693
>>>> 1.html.
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > LLVM Developers mailing list
>>>> > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>>>> > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>>>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>>>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20161110/98e9ee93/attachment.html>