search for: pipeliner

On 09/11/2017 10:42 AM, Sami Ketola wrote: >> On 11 Sep 2017, at 11.24, Nagy, Attila <bra at fsn.hu> wrote: >> I use dovecot with a broken IMAP server (which doesn't properly implement command pipelining amongst others) as an imapc backend. >> Dovecot issues the above command sequence (SELECT and UID FETCH pipelined), which doesn't work with this server. >>

On 09/11/2017 09:17 AM, Aki Tuomi wrote: > > On 08.09.2017 15:29, Nagy, Attila wrote: >> On 09/08/2017 01:53 PM, Aki Tuomi wrote: >>> On 08.09.2017 14:50, Nagy, Attila wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I've a broken IMAP server, which doesn't support pipelining and fails >>>> on dovecot's attempt to do this ([C] is

On 09/11/2017 11:14 AM, Aki Tuomi wrote: > > On 11.09.2017 11:59, Nagy, Attila wrote: >> On 09/11/2017 10:42 AM, Sami Ketola wrote: >>>> On 11 Sep 2017, at 11.24, Nagy, Attila <bra at fsn.hu> wrote: >>>> I use dovecot with a broken IMAP server (which doesn't properly >>>> implement command pipelining amongst others) as an imapc backend.

Is there a way to express a multiple pipeline itinerary using the current scheme (maybe some trick with setting NextCycles = 0)? Specifically, consider a case where a floating-point load simultaneously uses units from a floating-point pipeline and a load/store pipeline. Thanks in advance, Hal -- Hal Finkel Postdoctoral Appointee Leadership Computing Facility Argonne National Laboratory

From: Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2018 11:53 PM To: Romanova, Katya <katya.romanova at sony.com> Cc: David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com>; Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com>; llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] exploring possibilities for unifying ThinLTO and FullLTO frontend + initial optimization

Le mer. 11 avr. 2018 à 11:20, <katya.romanova at sony.com> a écrit : > > > > > *From:* Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com> > *Sent:* Tuesday, April 10, 2018 11:53 PM > *To:* Romanova, Katya <katya.romanova at sony.com> > *Cc:* David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com>; Teresa Johnson < > tejohnson at google.com>; llvm-dev <llvm-dev at

See attached some quick slides (backup from the dev meeting talk) about the pass pipeline. -- Mehdi Le mer. 11 avr. 2018 à 12:18, Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com> a écrit : > > > Le mer. 11 avr. 2018 à 11:20, <katya.romanova at sony.com> a écrit : > >> >> >> >> >> *From:* Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com> >> *Sent:*

Hi all, To implement more profile-guided optimizations, we’d like to use ProfileSummaryInfo (PSI) and BlockFrequencyInfo (BFI) from more passes of various types, under the new pass manager. The following is what we came up with. Would appreciate feedback. Thanks. Issue It’s not obvious (to me) how to best do this, given that we cannot request an outer-scope analysis result from an inner-scope

Here's a sketch of the proposed approach for just one pass (but imagine more) https://reviews.llvm.org/D58845 On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 12:54 PM Fedor Sergeev via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On 2/28/19 12:47 AM, Hiroshi Yamauchi via llvm-dev wrote: > > Hi all, > > To implement more profile-guided optimizations, we’d like to use > ProfileSummaryInfo

libswfdec/swfdec_codec_audio.c | 8 - libswfdec/swfdec_codec_gst.c | 271 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- 2 files changed, 270 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) New commits: diff-tree 68a17dfade3397478342d4c88fa9b9e3dc13f329 (from 01bf0e400ee99da0e96707f606d41bb23d5a8b48) Author: Benjamin Otte <otte@gnome.org> Date: Sun Apr 8 12:32:39 2007 +0200 make GStreamer do MP3

On 3/4/19 10:49 PM, Hiroshi Yamauchi wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 10:55 AM Hiroshi Yamauchi <yamauchi at google.com > <mailto:yamauchi at google.com>> wrote: > > > > On Sat, Mar 2, 2019 at 12:58 AM Fedor Sergeev > <fedor.sergeev at azul.com <mailto:fedor.sergeev at azul.com>> wrote: > > > > On 3/2/19 2:38 AM,

On 11.09.2017 13:09, Nagy, Attila wrote: > On 09/11/2017 11:14 AM, Aki Tuomi wrote: >> >> On 11.09.2017 11:59, Nagy, Attila wrote: >>> On 09/11/2017 10:42 AM, Sami Ketola wrote: >>>>> On 11 Sep 2017, at 11.24, Nagy, Attila <bra at fsn.hu> wrote: >>>>> I use dovecot with a broken IMAP server (which doesn't properly >>>>>

On 09/11/2017 03:01 PM, Aki Tuomi wrote: > On 11.09.2017 15:56, Nagy, Attila wrote: >> On 09/11/2017 12:12 PM, Aki Tuomi wrote: >>> Is there some reason you can't use normal proxy instead of imap backend? >>> That is,return proxy, host=imap_backend, port=1430? There seems to be no >>> pipeline setting currently for imapc in v2.2. >>> >> Yes,

On Sat, Mar 2, 2019 at 12:58 AM Fedor Sergeev <fedor.sergeev at azul.com> wrote: > > > On 3/2/19 2:38 AM, Hiroshi Yamauchi wrote: > > Here's a sketch of the proposed approach for just one pass (but imagine > more) > > https://reviews.llvm.org/D58845 > > On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 12:54 PM Fedor Sergeev via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>

Le mar. 10 avr. 2018 à 23:18, <katya.romanova at sony.com> a écrit : > Hi Mehdi, > > > > Awesome! It’s a very clear design. The only question left is which > pipeline to choose for unified compile-phase optimization pipeline. > > - ThinLTO compile-phase pipeline? It might very negatively affect > compile-time and the memory footprint for FullLTO link-phase.

On 09/08/2017 01:53 PM, Aki Tuomi wrote: > > On 08.09.2017 14:50, Nagy, Attila wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I've a broken IMAP server, which doesn't support pipelining and fails >> on dovecot's attempt to do this ([C] is dovecot's imapc, [S] is the >> IMAP server): >> >> [C] 24 LOGIN "user" "pass" >> [S] 23 OK

Hi Mehdi, Awesome! It’s a very clear design. The only question left is which pipeline to choose for unified compile-phase optimization pipeline. - ThinLTO compile-phase pipeline? It might very negatively affect compile-time and the memory footprint for FullLTO link-phase. That was the reason why so many optimization were moved from the link-phase to the parallel compile-phase for FullLTO

On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith < dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: > Since the compiler is always free to delete available_externally > functions, I think you could just add a pass to the -flto=thin pipeline > that deletes all of them (referenced or not) -- it's just a single loop > through all the functions deleting the bodies of those with the right

On 11.09.2017 11:59, Nagy, Attila wrote: > On 09/11/2017 10:42 AM, Sami Ketola wrote: >>> On 11 Sep 2017, at 11.24, Nagy, Attila <bra at fsn.hu> wrote: >>> I use dovecot with a broken IMAP server (which doesn't properly >>> implement command pipelining amongst others) as an imapc backend. >>> Dovecot issues the above command sequence (SELECT and UID

On 09/11/2017 12:12 PM, Aki Tuomi wrote: > Is there some reason you can't use normal proxy instead of imap backend? > That is,return proxy, host=imap_backend, port=1430? There seems to be no > pipeline setting currently for imapc in v2.2. > Yes, because it's a dumb IMAP server, which doesn't implement a lot of things, like SEARCH, FETCH BODYSTRUCTURE and similar. Dovecot