https://github.com/ThomasRaoux approved this pull request.
I'm not particularly familiar with this format but the changes look reasonable
and consistent with the other formats. LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99698
___
cfe-commits maili
https://github.com/ThomasRaoux approved this pull request.
Looks good to me
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/97179
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -6907,6 +7028,42 @@ TEST(APFloatTest, ConvertE2M3FToE3M2F) {
EXPECT_EQ(status, APFloat::opInexact);
}
+TEST(APFloatTest, ConvertDoubleToE2M1F) {
+ bool losesInfo;
ThomasRaoux wrote:
right, not sure why we re-initialize it in the other cases, it's not ve
@@ -6907,6 +7028,42 @@ TEST(APFloatTest, ConvertE2M3FToE3M2F) {
EXPECT_EQ(status, APFloat::opInexact);
}
+TEST(APFloatTest, ConvertDoubleToE2M1F) {
+ bool losesInfo;
ThomasRaoux wrote:
why is losesInfo not initialized in this case?
https://github.com/llvm
https://github.com/ThomasRaoux approved this pull request.
LGTM, thanks!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95392
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ThomasRaoux approved this pull request.
LGTM, please wait to confirm that everybody is happy with the naming before
merging.
@krzysz00 was your comment meant to be a blocker?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94735
___
cfe-
ThomasRaoux wrote:
> (If it's for MLIR support, I'd like to have a discussion there, since I don't
> thisk these scalars belong in `FloatType` and that the long-term solution is
> to allow arbitrary newtypes / tags on bits / ... up there)
I don't want to speak for the author but I'm interested
https://github.com/ThomasRaoux commented:
Looks good to me once the other comments are addressed. Thanks for the patch.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94735
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-b
https://github.com/ThomasRaoux approved this pull request.
Looks like it required quite a lot of cases to be handled :(
Thanks for doing this, it solves some of the problems triton had with latest
LLVM. Changes look good to me.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/67866
__
https://github.com/ThomasRaoux edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/67866
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -0,0 +1,1248 @@
+; NOTE: Assertions have been autogenerated by utils/update_llc_test_checks.py
UTC_ARGS: --version 3
+; ## Support i16x2 instructions
+; RUN: llc < %s -mtriple=nvptx64-nvidia-cuda -mcpu=sm_90 -mattr=+ptx80 \
+; RUN: -O0 -disable-post-ra -frame-pointer=
https://github.com/ThomasRaoux approved this pull request.
Looks like it required quite a lot of cases to be handled :(
Thanks for doing this, it solves some of the problems triton had with latest
LLVM. Changes look good to me.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/67866
__
ThomasRaoux wrote:
I ran the patch on our triton kernels and I don't see any functional problems
left.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/67866
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listi
13 matches
Mail list logo
