arsenm wrote: > @arsenm I agree that the default should be assuming fine-grained is possible. > My thinking behind the original naming and direction was not wanting to > introduce an unexpected performance regression by default. I'm happy for both > to be changed, and this patch being rebased on top of #85052 once it is > merged.
The opting for fast-and-maybe-broken by default needs to be a frontend decision (i.e. the language can choose to add the metadata to all atomics). I believe @yxsamliu is going to be working on the frontend half which will preserve the HIP behavior > > One oustanding question for me is, although outside of the scope of this PR, > how will the original 'no-unsafe-fp' option fit in the new metadata node in > terms of constraints? Would it imply a new constraint or be covered by > `no_fine_grained` and `no_remote`? I believe we need an additional piece of metadata (which I have another draft for) to express the relaxable floating point. We can express the unsafe-fp-math option with the 2 combined, and then can drop the old IR attribute 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
