Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add i32x4.dot_i16x8_s #2420

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 4, 2019
Merged

Add i32x4.dot_i16x8_s #2420

merged 1 commit into from
Nov 4, 2019

Conversation

tlively
Copy link
Member

@tlively tlively commented Nov 4, 2019

This experimental instruction is specified in
WebAssembly/simd#127 and is being implemented
to enable further investigation of its performance impact.

This experimental instruction is specified in
WebAssembly/simd#127 and is being implemented
to enable further investigation of its performance impact.
@tlively tlively requested a review from aheejin November 4, 2019 20:39
case DotSVecI16x8ToVecI32x4:
o << int8_t(BinaryConsts::SIMDPrefix)
<< U32LEB(BinaryConsts::I32x4DotSVecI16x8);
break;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It's not particularly about thie PR but Just curious, is there a reason we have different names for Op and BinaryConsts, such as ExtractLaneSVecI18x16 vs. I8x16ExtractLaneS?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The BinaryConsts exactly mirror the underlying instruction naming with . and _ removed and the name CamelCased, but the Binaryen Op names are shuffled around to put the operation first and the relevant types later. This name change is meant to increase clarity by emphasizing the operation over the types, but it can also make the types clearer in conversion ops by inserting To into the op name, as in DotSVecI16x8ToVecI32x4.

@tlively tlively merged commit 368f8a7 into WebAssembly:master Nov 4, 2019
@tlively tlively deleted the simd-dotprod branch April 24, 2020 23:22
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants