================ @@ -16049,6 +16094,84 @@ of the two arguments. -0.0 is considered to be less than +0.0 for this intrinsic. Note that these are the semantics specified in the draft of IEEE 754-2019. +.. _i_minimumnum: + +'``llvm.minimumnum.*``' Intrinsic +^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ + +Syntax: +""""""" + +This is an overloaded intrinsic. You can use ``llvm.minimumnum`` on any +floating-point or vector of floating-point type. Not all targets support +all types however. + +:: + + declare float @llvm.minimumnum.f32(float %Val0, float %Val1) + declare double @llvm.minimumnum.f64(double %Val0, double %Val1) + declare x86_fp80 @llvm.minimumnum.f80(x86_fp80 %Val0, x86_fp80 %Val1) + declare fp128 @llvm.minimumnum.f128(fp128 %Val0, fp128 %Val1) + declare ppc_fp128 @llvm.minimumnum.ppcf128(ppc_fp128 %Val0, ppc_fp128 %Val1) + +Overview: +""""""""" + +The '``llvm.minimumnum.*``' intrinsics return the minimum of the two +arguments, not propagating NaNs and treating -0.0 as less than +0.0. + + +Arguments: +"""""""""" + +The arguments and return value are floating-point numbers of the same +type. + +Semantics: +"""""""""" +If both operands are NaNs, returns qNaN. Otherwise returns the lesser +of the two arguments. -0.0 is considered to be less than +0.0 for this +intrinsic. Note that these are the semantics specified in IEEE 754-2019. ---------------- wzssyqa wrote:
> Needs to spell out the signaling nan behavior. If we're fixing minnum's snan > behavior to match IEEE, this is identical except with the stronger guarantee > for signed zero ordering. The documentation should also explicitly state this > is the only difference, to help reduce confusion. Alternatively, we could add > an immediate bool parameter to minnum/maxnum for whether the ordering of 0 is > guaranteed > OK. I will add more details here. > I hate the naming mess we've ended up with here, but I guess C23 has damned > us. If you're going to match the C23 names, this should be `llvm.minimum.num` > with an extra _ In fact, in my initial version of patch, I use _, then I get `llvm.minimum.num`. I considered it as a problem, since it cost some time to know in fact I should use `llvm.minimum.num` instead of `llvm.minimum_num` :( https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93841 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
