Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:110503 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 74309 invoked from network); 13 Jun 2020 16:53:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 13 Jun 2020 16:53:24 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27F9E1804B7 for ; Sat, 13 Jun 2020 08:38:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on php-smtp4.php.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-ASN: AS15169 209.85.128.0/17 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from mail-lj1-f180.google.com (mail-lj1-f180.google.com [209.85.208.180]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Sat, 13 Jun 2020 08:38:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lj1-f180.google.com with SMTP id c17so14329597lji.11 for ; Sat, 13 Jun 2020 08:38:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=VJT9k5YpasPaZvITavMi2NA78Ruz99B/pP3/q/r5E98=; b=dlJtewfJBN8nr+9iuzooz4Uf+GScGoG46zyglswJzZnYpURkDuNd2OsHV4VaCAWl6h zOM5cBul66er/3LLlIMCjaaIyslkXg9Y6OtpdHFNLEirhO186fJNFmprh///wch5Fe8D 7CXrjPeoSr/OOyIjojetbXsPi+FS81O3gY2YtwP5Wttdr3lPGizacTS+rSt66Y3wm1ho oYgPfHKYcvvkovbkwHRr66n2b4sPb5HXk/Dlv0R1I2FjtHhQgqUPh2VYxXnHqjjx6TaH zzz9Fl2xIeK60Dbbr+642j9b7BFJIogl/avRJULUnC80RkozOJkmTXs9lKpD5bRdsEY4 SKZA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=VJT9k5YpasPaZvITavMi2NA78Ruz99B/pP3/q/r5E98=; b=hoi4hALP6S+sKJxeZZZd/6bgSF+dwa/yhdkPdSIZjR9TfbAGBziBTdI6zRJ4OQkxOQ g3ZtftmjSIS24mfQrHfPPYX/VH0wVVE5n6b6kChp4EYorMokoNlkuAKP407n+neb3uAN fkAW91PamRpWBbEyb9vDVBLhrVLG7/j+hMZOuxuf1WUj1XHyNmh1bH5TWSN0WCErLTWm cMojvjDj7whXzOCgXCrcvbauv1HM39Fs6/P3ntI5BrKAGZ0trmcNUZUAAbRTo5iJdwKq AlNinyFwlIfeYlrcmPcYwa2gZsFkdaIzMKDKdOJVeA5ZykO7GSQl8vwn6ye2eNnApeFZ +DZA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533/QxrYd6qHOFdS63BZbOoI2jYKSJfNxUCFpmDsrPh0F5eW7LGO e6YT3JyH5++jlk3kxVggxV+r29H/Np1ZVF+JMlIBukqn X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy23K61XiS+gYLYsvGIeIaNqP2AefdI55afaNeDz2WQiZOUNrIk+9sWgR0wMWLMLMrNIBGXDgno703irnoTbSg= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:908f:: with SMTP id l15mr8437673ljg.307.1592062683031; Sat, 13 Jun 2020 08:38:03 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2020 17:37:47 +0200 Message-ID: To: tyson andre Cc: "internals@lists.php.net" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000aeac7e05a7f8fa62" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [Declined] Opcache optimization without any caching From: nikita.ppv@gmail.com (Nikita Popov) --000000000000aeac7e05a7f8fa62 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 5:08 PM tyson andre wrote: > Hi internals, > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/opcache.no_cache has been declined, with 10 yes > votes and 13 no votes. > > The "If you voted no, why?" section indicates that there was broad support > for moving opcache optimizations outside of the zend_extension and into > core instead of this approach. > > After the RFC ended, I added a section with some rough ideas for > implementation details of how moving optimizations into core instead would > be done (while continuing to support existing php use cases efficiently) > in > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/opcache.no_cache#ideas_on_moving_the_optimizer_into_core_instead > , > but ran into roadblocks trying to implement it. > To be clear, "move into core" means moving optimizations into Zend/ and making them part of the compilation process (optionally). They shouldn't be in a separate ext/optimizer extension -- that would be not much better than having them in ext/opcache :) Nikita > I probably won't end up implementing this, because it's a much more > extensive refactoring. > I'm not familiar enough with opcache to know if what I'd implement would > end up working on all platforms (threaded vs non-threaded, windows memory > management, etc), > or if it'd interfere with existing debuggers/profiles, or have other > shortcomings I didn't anticipate. > > Thanks, > - Tyson > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > --000000000000aeac7e05a7f8fa62--