[PATCH] D74156: [llvm-exegesis] Exploring X86::OperandType::OPERAND_COND_CODE

[Roman Lebedev via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

lebedev.ri added a comment.

In D74156#1869864 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D74156#1869864>, @gchatelet wrote:

> In D74156#1869576 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D74156#1869576>, @lebedev.ri wrote:
>
> > Let me know how to proceed.
> >
> > I know this doesn't scale, because i have designed it this way,
> >  because i don't really expect it to be used for exhaustive sweeping,
> >  but only exploring a few operands, because this is the real problem i have :]
> >
> > Is the traditional iterative approach not acceptable for this tool,
> >  and the intention is to only get the the One True Solution,
> >  even if it potentially takes ages before it's there?
>
>
> I'm confused by your answer.


That is because i'm confused by the feedback so far :)
That might be because of the differences in the dialogue structure from the usual in llvm.
(sometimes previously elsewhere this cautious non-committing-to-outcome feedback
meant polite 'no thank you' without actually stating as much)

> I am not against this patch, I just want to explain where I'd like the tool to go in the long run.
>  And since you responded to my comment with a code change and the creation of the `CombinationGenerator` I thought you were trying to implement what I suggested. Hence my answers.
> 
> If you don't intend to implement it, that's fine.
> 
> I've added a few comments.




Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D74156/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D74156