>> But it would make the pointer IV updates more complex. So let's
>> say that that's the reason for preferring solution 3.
Yes, I prefer pointer solution 3 to avoid complex IV updates and there is
no benefits in solution 2(unlike single-rgroup).
I read your comments, it's more comprehensive tha
Hi, Richard.
>> No, I meant that the comment I quoted seemed to be saying that solution
>> 3 wasn't possible. The comment seemed to say that we would need to do
>> solution 1.
I am so sorry that I didn't write the comments accurately.
Could you help me with comments ? Base on what we have discuss
Hi, Richard. Thanks for the comments.
>> If we use SELECT_VL to refer only to the target-independent ifn, I don't
>> see why this last bit is true.
Could you give me more details and information about this since I am not sure
whether I catch up with you.
You mean the current SELECT_VL is not an
