jaykang10 added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D30810#699695, @bruno wrote:
> Hi JinGu, > > I just read the discussion on cfe-dev, some comments: > > > My colleague and I are implementing a transformation pass between LLVM IR > > and another IR and we want to keep the 3-component vector types in our > > target IR > > Why can't you go back through the shuffle to find out that it comes from a > vec3 -> vec4 transformation? Adding a flag here just for that seems very odd. Hi Bruno, Thanks for your comment. We have a pass to undo the vec4 to vec3. I wondered why clang generates the vec4 for vec3 load/store. As you can see the comment on clang's code, they are generated for better performance. I had a questions at this point. clang should consider vector load/store aligned by 4 regardless of target??? llvm's codegen could handle vec3 according to targets' vector load/store with their alignment. I agree the flag looks odd but I was concerned some llvm's targets depend on the vec4 so I suggested to add the flag. If I missed something, please let me know. https://reviews.llvm.org/D30810 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
