jhuber6 wrote: > Overall I think it is the right way to go. Memory scope has been used by > different offloading languages and the atomic clang builtins are essentially > the same. Adding a generic clang atomic builtins with memory scope allows > code sharing among offloading languages.
I agree, I'm hoping to hear something from people more familiar with C/C++ or GNU stuff to see if they agree with this direction. Also it might help to decide on some better names for the memory scopes. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/72280 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
