[llvm-dev] Scalable Vector Types in IR - Next Steps?

[Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev]

On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 11:22 AM Finkel, Hal J. via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> On 3/15/19 10:58 AM, David Greene wrote:
> > Renato Golin <rengolin at gmail.com> writes:
> >
> >> On Fri, 15 Mar 2019 at 15:30, Finkel, Hal J. via llvm-dev
> >> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >>> I've talked with a number of people about this as well, and I think
> that
> >>> I understand the objections. I'm happy that ARM followed through with
> >>> the alternate set of patches. Regardless, however, unless those who had
> >>> wished to object still wish to object, and then actually do so, we now
> >>> clearly have a good collection of contributors actively desiring to do
> >>> code review, and we should move forward (i.e., start committing patches
> >>> once they're judged ready).
> >> Let's start by closing the three flying revisions, so that people that
> >> weren't involved in the discussion don't waste time looking at them.
> > See the reply I just posted to Hal.  I am not sure we've made a decision
> > to abandon the current patches.  We may in fact decide that, but I
> > haven't seen consensus for doing so yet.  In fact I've seen the opposite
> > -- that people want to move forward with the scalable types.
>
>
> I agree with David. We should move forward with native support for
> scalable types.
>

Sorry I haven't been as available as usual for the past few weeks, but
FWIW, I still am unconvinced that scalable vector types belong in the IR.

I think this adds complexity to LLVM's IR to serve a niche use case without
proven benefit to a broad spectrum of hardware or software. I think the
complexity is significant and will be a net drag on all parts of the IR and
IR-level transformations. But I don't really think it is useful to re-hash
all these debates. Nothing relevant has changed in the years this has been
discussed.

That said, if I'm the only one who feels this way (and is willing to
actually state this publicly), I'm not going to stop progress.

-Chandler
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20190315/58d5a129/attachment.html>