search for: pipelining

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. >> >> Therefore I'm requesting an imapc_features setting, IMAPC_FEATURE_NO_PIPELINING, which disables PIPELINING in dove...

.../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 dovecot's imapc, [S] is the >>>> IMAP server): >>>> >>>> [C] 24 LOGIN "user" "pass" >>>> [S] 23 OK >>>> [C] 25 SELECT "INBOX" >>...

...; 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 FETCH >>>> pipelined), which doesn't work with this server. >>>> >>>> Therefore I'm requesting an imapc_features setting, >>>> IMAP...

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:*

...lace We could consider computing BFI “in-place” by directly running BFI outside of the pass manager [7]. This would let us avoid using the analysis manager constraints but it would still involve running an outer-scope analysis from an inner-scope pass and potentially cause problems in terms of pass pipelining and concurrency. Moreover, a potential downside of running analyses in-place is that it won’t take advantage of cached analysis results provided by the pass manager. Adding inner-scope versions of PSI and BFI We could consider adding a function-level and loop-level PSI and loop-level BFI, which in...

...e time > on being local to a particular small piece of IR. Loop Pass manager allows > you to run a whole pipeline of different transformations still locally, > amplifying the save. > As soon as you run function-level analysis from within the loop pipeline > you essentially break this pipelining. > Say, as you run your loop transformation it modifies the loop (and the > function) and potentially invalidates the analysis, > so you have to rerun your analysis again and again. Hence instead of > saving on compile time it ends up increasing it. > Exactly. > I have hit this...

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

...op >> Pass manager allows you to run a whole pipeline of >> different transformations still locally, amplifying the save. >> As soon as you run function-level analysis from within >> the loop pipeline you essentially break this pipelining. >> Say, as you run your loop transformation it modifies the >> loop (and the function) and potentially invalidates the >> analysis, >> so you have to rerun your analysis again and again. Hence >> instead of s...

...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 FETCH >>>>> pipelined), which doesn't work with this server. >>>>> >>>>> Therefore I'm requesting an imapc_features setting, >&...

...t; Yes, because it's a dumb IMAP server, which doesn't implement a lot of >> things, like SEARCH, FETCH BODYSTRUCTURE and similar. >> Dovecot is used as a smart proxy, which makes it possible to use it as >> a fully featured IMAP server. > Does the dumb server advertize pipelining? > Exactly how does an IMAP server advertise pipelining other than it says it's an IMAP server? :) There is no such capability, extension etc. It's in RFC3501, which defines IMAP v4r1. Dovecot has a proxy_nopipelining setting for its IMAP proxy, I just want to use that (ie: no pipeli...

...eing local to a particular small piece of IR. Loop Pass manager >> allows you to run a whole pipeline of different transformations still >> locally, amplifying the save. >> As soon as you run function-level analysis from within the loop pipeline >> you essentially break this pipelining. >> Say, as you run your loop transformation it modifies the loop (and the >> function) and potentially invalidates the analysis, >> so you have to rerun your analysis again and again. Hence instead of >> saving on compile time it ends up increasing it. >> > > Ex...

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 >> [C] 25 SELECT "INBOX" >> [C] 23 UID FETCH 2 (INTERNALDATE) >> [S]...

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 FETCH >>> pipelined), which doesn't work with this server. >>> >>> Therefore I'm requesting an imapc_features setting, >>> IMAPC_FEATURE_NO_PIPELIN...

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