Potential sync optimizations for single-threaded schedulers

Inizia riproducendo l’esempio Godbolt e leggendo le implementazioni di sync_wait, async_scope e inline_scheduler menzionate nell’issue. Traccia dove vengono introdotti i mutex e le variabili di condizione e se in quel punto sono disponibili informazioni sul tipo di scheduler. Il lavoro è completo quando viene stabilito se la sincronizzazione a thread singolo può essere rimossa in sicurezza e viene documentata una direzione concreta per l’implementazione, oppure il motivo per cui il design lo impedisce.

I've been playing around with stdexec and had a thought about sync_wait and async_scope that I wanted to run by the community. I might be missing something obvious here, so please let me know if this doesn't make sense!

I noticed that when using sync_wait with inline_scheduler, we still use mutexes and condition variables internally, even though we know the work will run on the calling thread. Same thing seems to happen with async_scope when all tasks run on a single thread.

I was wondering:

1. Is there a way (or maybe there already is?) to optimize away this synchronization overhead when we know at compile-time that everything will run on the same thread?
2. Does the sender type system provide enough information to detect these cases?

Quick example of what made me think about this (godbolt):

#include <stdexec/execution.hpp>
#include <exec/inline_scheduler.hpp>

int main(int argc, char* argv[]) {
  auto sdr = stdexec::schedule(exec::inline_scheduler{})
    | stdexec::then([argc] { return argc; })
    | stdexec::then([](auto n) { return 2 * n; });
    
  auto [res] = stdexec::sync_wait(std::move(sdr)).value();

  return res;
}

I expected the generated assembly to be equivalent, or extremely close, to simply writing:

int main(int argc, char* argv[]) {
    auto then_f = [](auto n) { return 2 * n; };
    auto [res] = std::optional{std::tuple{std::move(then_f)(argc)}}.value();
    return res;
}

However, the generated code uses mutexes and condition variables.

I was thinking: could sync_wait potentially use type traits from the active scheduler to determine if it needs to be thread-safe? That way, it could avoid mutexes and condition variables in single-threaded cases.

The same could apply to async_scopes that run in single-threaded environments.

If my understanding of sync_wait and inline_scheduler is incorrect, please let me know!
Otherwise, it would be interesting to know whether such overhead is avoidable in single-threaded cases or if it's inherently tied to the design.

Thanks for any insights!