Conversation
|
OS:ubuntu-20.04 |
|
OS:ubuntu-20.04 |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixed many bugs that have to do with nested loops, tested several different configurations (it is certain that there are more bugs but let's fix them once they appear). One thing we need to keep in mind is how we do unrolling and progressing of the partial order, which now feels a little flaky, e.g., to determine if a loop node X can be committed when we receive a wait for some node Y, I perform a very complex comparison of X and Y using their ids, loop iterations, and loop ids. There must be a better way to do that. Maybe first unroll and then check? I don't think this is relevant for this PR, and I have left comments describing the issue in the code, so it should be resolvable.