MaskRay wrote:

> In principle, I think this is fine but it does not really feel right to 
> continue to expose `getThreadIndex()`, so perhaps that should be removed if 
> this change is accepted?

`getThreadIndex()` is no longer used and I can delete it in this patch, once 
209687 is accepted.

> The only other thing that comes to mind is that the caller could get delayed 
> by work initiated by another caller thread which could then introduce 
> latency. But I do not believe that this situation arises right now.

Agreed.

> I haven't had much time to consider this in detail and will soon be on PTO 
> for 2 weeks.

Thanks for the heads up!


https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/209690
_______________________________________________
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits

Reply via email to