[PATCH] D48240: Try again to implement a FIFO task queue

[Zachary Turner via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

zturner added a comment.

In https://reviews.llvm.org/D48240#1137381, @chandlerc wrote:

> Really nice approach for THREADS=0 w/ the deferred future that checks that "enough" of the queue has been processed. I like it.
>
> If you want to avoid the address stability stuff, you could always keep an integer next to the things in the queue and track the integers...
>
> I want to think a bit harder to understand if using the address creates an A-B-A problem. I feel like it does, but my brain is exhausted and not able to pin it down yet.


I don't think it does, because in the `LLVM_ENABLE_THREADS=0` case, there's literally only one thread in the entire application.


https://reviews.llvm.org/D48240