Skip to content

Conversation

@alexreinking
Copy link
Member

A concurrent complement to #8893

AddAtomicMutex.cpp is a little scary, actually.

@alexreinking alexreinking requested a review from abadams December 8, 2025 19:55
[&](auto *self, const For *op) {
// At this stage of lowering, loop_min and loop_max
// conveniently exist in scope.
Interval in(Variable::make(Int(32), op->name + ".loop_min"),
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

FYI: This is likely to have a merge conflict with #8858

private:
Stmt inject_marker(const Stmt &stmt, const string &func, const Stmt &last_use) {
bool injected = false;
return mutate_with(stmt, [&](auto *self, const Block *block) -> Stmt {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

do_injection could take a const Stmt & (an inefficiency, if it is one, also exists in the original). I can't figure out why clang-tidy isn't complaining about it already. Is there something I'm missing?

@abadams
Copy link
Member

abadams commented Dec 9, 2025

There are some clang-tidy things to fix, but I believe the failures are unrelated.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants