jtb20 wrote: > > Can you explain why the critical section version of the code is safe, and > > why it is an improvement over simply not collapsing the loop? > > 1. I'm not saying it is safe, I'm just saying that something like this might > be safe > 2. Without properly collapsing the loops, the compiler won't be able to > properly schedule the execution per programmer's request
Yes, OK. The trouble is, I'm still not sure that there **is** "something like this" that lets the collapsed loop execute correctly with independent iterations. (There might be declarations in the "imperfect" part of the loop -- that's probably the most likely thing to be there, in fact. That makes conditionalising those bits or putting them inside other synthesised directives more complicated). Maybe I'll think about it some more. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96087 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
