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

Calyx Backend uses static groups instead of attribute #400

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

calebmkim
Copy link
Contributor

Simple change to use static group <lateny> instead of <"static"=latency> for the Calyx backend.

}
group let1<"static"=1> {
static group <1> let1 {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm confused, I thought the latency attribute comes after the name? Also, can we get rid of the space between the name and the latency?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ah yeah my bad. I'll change it.

Copy link
Member

@rachitnigam rachitnigam left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

One clarification question but LGTM otherwise!

@sampsyo
Copy link
Contributor

sampsyo commented May 7, 2023

Wahoo; nice work on this!

@rachitnigam
Copy link
Member

@calebmkim just checking what's the status of this PR?

@calebmkim
Copy link
Contributor Author

Ah, we can merge it. I was just thinking, though: without the control-promotion pass it will make very inefficient hardware: we will keep on instantiating a single fsm for each group. But maybe it'll be helpful just to check the correctness of our compile-static pass regardless?

@rachitnigam
Copy link
Member

Hm, that's a fair point! Should we wait till control promotion stuff is done and then merge it as a part of our efforts to close out the static groups milestone?

@calebmkim
Copy link
Contributor Author

Not going to merge this. We have decided to just emit @promotable as a hint that can be ignored.

@calebmkim calebmkim closed this Feb 8, 2024
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.

None yet

3 participants