[PATCH] D67784: [WebAssembly] vNxM.load_splat instructions

[Heejin Ahn via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

aheejin accepted this revision.
aheejin added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.

Mostly LGTM. By the way this contains diff of D67783 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D67783> as well.



================
Comment at: llvm/lib/Target/WebAssembly/WebAssemblyInstrSIMD.td:62
+  let mayLoad = 1, UseNamedOperandTable = 1,
+      Predicates = [HasUnimplementedSIMD128] in
+  defm LOAD_SPLAT_#vec :
----------------
I asked the same question in D67783, but why do we not need `SIMD128`? Other parts below too


================
Comment at: llvm/lib/Target/WebAssembly/WebAssemblyInstrSIMD.td:75
+
+def wasm_load_splat_t : SDTypeProfile<1, 1, []>;
+def wasm_load_splat : SDNode<"WebAssemblyISD::LOAD_SPLAT", wasm_load_splat_t>;
----------------
Don't we need `SDTCisPtrTy<0>`?


================
Comment at: llvm/lib/Target/WebAssembly/WebAssemblyInstrSIMD.td:78
+
+foreach args = [["v16i8", "i32", "extloadi8"], ["v8i16", "i32", "extloadi16"],
+                ["v4i32", "i32", "load"], ["v2i64", "i64", "load"],
----------------
Do we only do zero extension for splats?


================
Comment at: llvm/lib/Target/WebAssembly/WebAssemblyInstrSIMD.td:83
+  PatFrag<(ops node:$addr), (wasm_load_splat
+            (!cast<ValueType>(args[1]) (!cast<PatFrag>(args[2]) node:$addr)))>;
+
----------------
Didn't know we can use `foreach` like this :D


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D67784/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D67784