[PATCH] Remove support for runtime multithreading
chandlerc at google.com
Fri Jun 13 15:25:50 PDT 2014
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 11:01 PM, Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com> wrote:
> I tried this once and ran into some difficulty, because before this
> change, the Mutex is a pointer which null is an expected value if
> llvm_start_multithreaded has not been called. So the function would have
> to return a pointer to the mutex. That would require changing MutexGuard
> to take a pointer instead of a reference, which would generate a ton of
> I'll have another stab at it and see if there's a way to do it in a way
> that has very little churn and still contributes to this change as well.
I would make there always be a mutex as you do in this change? Is there
some reason that dosen't work? I'm not worried about these being no-ops
when multithreading is disabled as long as they're correct.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the llvm-commits