fpetrogalli added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D30739#706292, @Hahnfeld wrote:
> In principal looks good to me although I'm not really familiar with this > part. Does that work for you if you have the `declare simd` in a header file > and the implementation in another file? On x86_64 I currently get: The current infrastructure for vector names generation works only for function definition. Ideally we should implement it also for function definition provided by external libraries. > remark: loop not vectorized: call instruction cannot be vectorized > > > But that seems to be a general problem inside LLVM's LoopVectorize pass... AFAIK, none of the machinery required in LLVM to expose the mangled names in the vectorizer is present in trunk. There is a patch for x86 under review that does that: https://reviews.llvm.org/D22792 https://reviews.llvm.org/D30739 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
