> Based on my previous re-review of LLVM, thanks to @tqchen, it might help to > use my_target.features.dsp rather than my_target.arch.has_dsp and clarifying > these are features available to the Target? What do you think?
I like that, and the renaming makes it clear which are boolean parameters and which are variable attributes. That would also be useful for cleaning up the [Vulkan target](https://github.com/apache/tvm/blob/main/src/target/target_kind.cc#L341), which right now has a large number of boolean attributes that would be better expressed as feature support. The renaming would also help with avoiding architecture-specific checks at the code review stage. Since the information defined by the architecture would be pulled over into `my_target.features`, checks that directly access `my_target.arch` should only occur for case (1). -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/apache/tvm-rfcs/pull/71#issuecomment-1130250850 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: <apache/tvm-rfcs/pull/71/c1130250...@github.com>
