-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 314
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Optimize Phase1. #1289
Optimize Phase1. #1289
Conversation
2755c2c
to
21e4820
Compare
db08d49
to
155fc31
Compare
1c52ea5
to
fc78c04
Compare
fc78c04
to
0313c66
Compare
std::slice::from_raw_parts_mut((*self.bufs.get()).as_mut_ptr(), 2) | ||
} | ||
|
||
// TODO: is this actually needed? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's not currently used. It was split into the start and finish portions and split across layer-transition boundaries. I think it remains useful documentation of intent. It could probably be refactored into a call to start then finish, which would serve that purpose even better.
This implements Sealing optimizations but needs a little more cleanup.
@dignifiedquire An early step in this was simplification of the previous sealing (an intentional regression to facilitate moving forward). Now that we have decided to retain previous behavior and make the optimizations (initially) opt-in, some work is required to restore the previous behavior. I started in on this, but it's incomplete, as you will see.
If you have some time and the will to do it, you could reenable the previous behavior. The setting-based selection is implemented, but the
generate_labels
code path now calls the simplified, intermediate code. Instead, it should call the previous code — which is deleted in this PR's first commit. Once that is restored, this work will be almost done.