yxsamliu wrote: > We're gradually converging on something that looks like this, subject to bike > shedding the name
I did not know about this PR. It is interesting that our other discussions lead to similar solution. I agree that per-instruction metadata is needed, and the metadata should convey separate control for fp atomic and unsupported integer atomic across PCIE. The reason to use per-instruction metadata instead of per-function metadata or attribute is that per-function attribute does not work well for inlined functions. As for controlling FE emitting this metadata, a more-fine-grained control e.g. pragma is desirable, however, for this patch, a clang option is probably sufficient. We could consider pragma control later. We need to coin some good concise name for the metadata: For unsafe fp atomic - unsafe_fp ? For unsupported integer atomic across PCIE - unsafe_pcie ? fine_grained may not be suitable since fine_grained memory accessed across XGMI supports integer atomic AND/OR/XOR ops etc https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/69229 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
