[PATCH] D68408: [InstCombine] Negator - sink sinkable negations

Mon Apr 13 14:41:42 PDT 2020

lebedev.ri added a comment.

It'd be great if we could separate the new intrinsics disscussion from this patch..

In D68408#1977656 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D68408#1977656>, @spatel wrote:

> In D68408#1976807 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D68408#1976807>, @lebedev.ri wrote:
>
> > In D68408#1976790 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D68408#1976790>, @spatel wrote:
> >
> > > In D68408#1976039 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D68408#1976039>, @lebedev.ri wrote:
> > >
> > > > 1. add `Abs` IR instruction (i think not)
> > >
> > >
> > > Is the answer the same for an intrinsic?
> >
> >
> > Ack, i meant instruction/intrinsic interchangeably here.
>
>
> We have grown more accepting of intrinsics (overflow, saturating, funnel, etc.) recently, so I'm not sure if the old arguments against an abs intrinsic still hold. Is there anything in particular about abs() that makes it different?

No, i just don't want to condition this patch on introduction of whole new set of intrinsics :]

Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D68408/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D68408