[PATCH] D28018: AMD family 17h (znver1) enablement

[Simon Pilgrim via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

RKSimon added inline comments.


================
Comment at: lib/Basic/Targets.cpp:3189
     break;
+  case CK_ZNVER1:
+    setFeatureEnabledImpl(Features, "adx", true);
----------------
GGanesh wrote:
> RKSimon wrote:
> > Same as what I asked on D28017 - is there an accepted order that we should be using here?
> Some of them seems to be chronological.
> Some of them are alphabetical.
> 
> I personally don't have any preference as such.
> Alphabetical order suits a long list. 
> I would like to know your suggestion.
@craig.topper Any preferences?

No strong preference and nothing that should slow the acceptance of this patch - alphabetical can be easier to maintain but it's unlikely this code changes often.

Sorting by feature groups/age can be more understandable, and can help account for the fall-through behaviour used in many of the cases here - speaking of which would it be useful to fall-through from CK_ZNVER1 to CK_BTVER2 to CK_BTVER1 since they seem to have a common set of features?


https://reviews.llvm.org/D28018