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

[David Greene via llvm-dev]

"Finkel, Hal J." <hfinkel at anl.gov> writes:

> 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.

Graham, which patch(es) would you like to concentrate on for review
first?  A number are marked "not for review."  Do you need to update
them before we continue reviewing?

                        -David