aheejin added a comment. General question about SIMD intrinsics: So we make dedicated wasm intrinsics only for the cases there are not general intrinsics people can use instead?
================ Comment at: clang/lib/Headers/wasm_simd128.h:171 + +#define wasm_v128_load8_lane(__ptr, __vec, __i) \ + ((v128_t)__builtin_wasm_load8_lane((signed char *)(__ptr), (__i8x16)(__vec), \ ---------------- dschuff wrote: > out of curiosity, why are these macros, while all the rest (including ones > that don't need declarations such as `wasm_i64x2_eq`) seem to be inline > functions? I was also curious about this too. ================ Comment at: clang/lib/Headers/wasm_simd128.h:648 +static __inline__ bool __DEFAULT_FN_ATTRS wasm_v128_any_true(v128_t __a) { + return __builtin_wasm_any_true_i8x16((__i8x16)__a); +} ---------------- Do we not rename the builtin to `v128` as well? ================ Comment at: clang/lib/Headers/wasm_simd128.h:969 +static __inline__ v128_t __DEFAULT_FN_ATTRS wasm_f32x4_ceil(v128_t __a) { + return (v128_t)__builtin_wasm_ceil_f32x4((__f32x4)__a); +} ---------------- Sometimes builtin names seem slightly different from intrinsic names like this case: the intrinsic name is `f32x4_ceil` while the builtin name is `ceil_f32x4`. Is that intentional? ================ Comment at: clang/lib/Headers/wasm_simd128.h:1389 + +// Old intrinsic names supported to ease transitioning to the stand names. Do +// not use these; they will be removed in the near future. ---------------- ================ Comment at: clang/lib/Headers/wasm_simd128.h:1398 + +#ifdef __DEPRECATED +#define __DEPRECATED_WASM_MACRO(__name, __replacement) \ ---------------- What does this macro do? ================ Comment at: clang/lib/Headers/wasm_simd128.h:1547 +static __inline__ v128_t __DEPRECATED_FN_ATTRS("wasm_u16x8_extend_low_u8x16") +wasm_i16x8_widen_low_u8x16(v128_t __a) { + return wasm_u16x8_extend_low_u8x16(__a); ---------------- The deprecated function name and the new intrinsic say `u`. Should this be `u` too? I haven't checked every single entry, but there seem to be multiple instances like this. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D101112/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D101112 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits