[PATCH] D47188: Intel SVML calling conventions

[Denis Nagorny via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

dvnagorny added inline comments.


================
Comment at: include/llvm/Analysis/TargetLibraryInfo.h:159
   bool isFunctionVectorizable(StringRef F, unsigned VF) const {
-    return !getVectorizedFunction(F, VF).empty();
+     bool IgnoreMeThere;
+     return !getVectorizedFunction(F, VF, IgnoreMeThere, false).empty();
----------------
hfinkel wrote:
> I think just "Ignored" is fine.
Will fix, thank you.


================
Comment at: include/llvm/IR/SVML.td:53
+// While SVML doesn't provide _ha versions of
+// the following symbols let's disable their vectorization.
+
----------------
hfinkel wrote:
> What does this mean? Why would a _ha variant of floor, for example, be needed for vectorization? Or, to put it another way, how would a _ha variant of floor differ from the _ep version?
Really I don't expect any difference in behaviour, However I think that link-time weak aliases for these symbols are more preferable here. It will not require any additional logic in function name mangling code.
 


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D47188