[PATCH] D92715: [Clang][RISCV] Define RISC-V V builtin types
Craig Topper via Phabricator via cfe-commits
cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org
Mon Dec 7 10:04:08 PST 2020
craig.topper added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/Basic/RISCVVTypes.def:67
+RVV_VECTOR_TYPE_INT("__rvv_int8m2_t", RvvInt8m2, RvvInt8m2Ty, 16, 8, 1, true)
+RVV_VECTOR_TYPE_INT("__rvv_int8m4_t", RvvInt8m4, RvvInt8m4Ty, 32, 8, 1, true)
+RVV_VECTOR_TYPE_INT("__rvv_int8m8_t", RvvInt8m8, RvvInt8m8Ty, 64, 8, 1, true)
----------------
craig.topper wrote:
> jrtc27 wrote:
> > liaolucy wrote:
> > > RISC-V V has too many types, more than 200. All types use builtin types? Is it possible to reduce the number of builtin types?
> > Indeed this is madness, what's wrong with just using `__attribute__((vector_size(n)))` on the right type? We should not be encouraging people to write code with architecture-specific types... but if we _really_ need these because RISC-V GCC decided this is how RISC-V V is going to look them can we not just shove them all in a header as typedef's for the architecture-independent attributed types and push that complexity out of the compiler itself?
> We are using <vscale x 1 x i64> to specify types in IR. The size of the fixed part is being used to control the LMUL parameter. There is currently no way to spell a scalable vector type in C in a generic way.
>
> Alternatively I guess we could make LMUL a parameter to the intrinsic and create the scalable IR types in the frontend based on it?
I do wonder why we bothered to have signed and unsigned types. The signedness of the operation should be carried in the intrinsic name.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D92715/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D92715
More information about the cfe-commits
mailing list