ksyx added a comment. In D102839#2784297 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D102839#2784297>, @luismarques wrote:
> In D102839#2784275 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D102839#2784275>, @ksyx wrote: > >> Thanks for mentioning that! Now, I changed the effect of `no-div` option >> into choosing a proper extension and implemented the `Zmmul` subextension. >> Is this solution acceptable or are there anything need further changes? > > It seems like the community is quickly converging on just using the ISA > string with Zmmul, and not using no-div. While being compatible with the GNU > tools is nice, if they are planning on dropping support for no-div soonish > then we probably shouldn't add support for it. IMO, Zmmul should be a > separate patch and presumably (at the moment) be gated by > `-menable-experimental-extensions`. Thanks for the news and I think having experimental-zmmul a separate patch is a good idea. But which implementation of `no-div` is better, the one that chooses extension between M and zmmul or the one that simply being an attribute like Diff 3, or are there any other suggestions? CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D102839/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D102839 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
