================ @@ -93,6 +93,7 @@ def int_dx_rsqrt : DefaultAttrsIntrinsic<[llvm_anyfloat_ty], [LLVMMatchType<0>] def int_dx_wave_active_countbits : DefaultAttrsIntrinsic<[llvm_i32_ty], [llvm_i1_ty], [IntrConvergent, IntrNoMem]>; def int_dx_wave_getlaneindex : DefaultAttrsIntrinsic<[llvm_i32_ty], [], [IntrConvergent, IntrNoMem]>; def int_dx_wave_is_first_lane : DefaultAttrsIntrinsic<[llvm_i1_ty], [], [IntrConvergent]>; +def int_dx_wave_activeanytrue : DefaultAttrsIntrinsic<[llvm_i1_ty], [llvm_i1_ty], [IntrConvergent]>; ---------------- V-FEXrt wrote:
I don't feel strongly either way, and I'm happy to rename but doesn't `wave.anyactivetrue` match the proposal as much as `wave.any` does while being more explicit? https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115902 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
