Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:36072 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 39741 invoked from network); 10 Mar 2008 01:29:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 10 Mar 2008 01:29:14 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=xuefer@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=xuefer@gmail.com; sender-id=pass; domainkeys=bad Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 64.233.178.242 as permitted sender) DomainKey-Status: bad X-DomainKeys: Ecelerity dk_validate implementing draft-delany-domainkeys-base-01 X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: xuefer@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 64.233.178.242 hs-out-0708.google.com Received: from [64.233.178.242] ([64.233.178.242:49963] helo=hs-out-0708.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 63/51-31254-9EE84D74 for ; Sun, 09 Mar 2008 20:29:14 -0500 Received: by hs-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id j58so1301238hsj.7 for ; Sun, 09 Mar 2008 18:29:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; bh=T5pQZIq+OLTmiIrVSQWe6fk5CuTbQu+J9plpzMoevOI=; b=cR6G/e1wDFaRIvqsWo0G2PivcJf9guJfrtn0GjbobvYIqK6INrThTeJpiwjRAylkaStLrIhiai0Pv9Rm9dUHhXEeHf/U3kdlyKt/CY0xPo7rterOeLf6CFMF0Bkw8W9WMyj2yJqTgdCrLx9yUu3sL9JRi69EBy4oYAx/MXkcBuM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=INIEuE4j+5JXMpYFmZa1ejh6mEC375ujc5CA+6W8T+RPq1vDWE1L3FvRMoaXpCVRidVlNOBnYQX4QJRlN7Sl/elk8JFhX0DvCvWO8WvlbkKvGbzyvXE9LUiweZgEBiqQw5+gUe1TbOp1EYkJ/CgBYYT7dlSBNUEkN423rnEBQD8= Received: by 10.114.120.1 with SMTP id s1mr2615995wac.137.1205112551092; Sun, 09 Mar 2008 18:29:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.115.33.6 with HTTP; Sun, 9 Mar 2008 18:29:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <28139bc0803091829y3493eeecj38c439466dd7e15a@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 09:29:11 +0800 Sender: xuefer@gmail.com To: "Marcus Boerger" Cc: "Dmitry Stogov" , "Derick Rethans" , "internals Mailing List" , "Andi Gutmans" , "Stas Malyshev" In-Reply-To: <82388890.20080309225950@marcus-boerger.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <06B0D32C7A96544490D18AF653D6BDE50261887F@il-ex1.zend.net> <82388890.20080309225950@marcus-boerger.de> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 89f101acd66f2db6 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Patch for opcode caches From: phpxcache@gmail.com (phpxcache) On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 5:59 AM, Marcus Boerger wrote: > Hello Dmitry, > > please don't apply. The patch looks rather rough and untested (see below). > Also I really disagree to making the engine even more complex and adding > even more different behavior ways. That way we just introduce more errors > as we cannot test the engine in all its modes. We simply do not have the > infrastructure for that. And that means we will add even more bugs. > > Further more I am missgin a description what you really do here and why we > need to do that. Ok Opcode caches have issues but so far all attempts to do > somethign about that have been blocked. Now this one apparently has a new > option. But as far as I can tell it simply allows to change the compiler to > an opcode friendly order. If that is all what it does than we should simply > drop all the options and do it anyway without flags. > just a summary of the patch for those who don't have time to read it: ZEND_COMPILE_EXTENDED_INFO is a new way for the extended_info = 1, no logic changed except the api, only a few modules is affected, and yes it can be changed back to avoid breaking 3rd modules at source level the issues relatived to ZEND_COMPILE_DELAYED_BINDING / ZEND_COMPILE_IGNORE_INTERNAL_* can be fixed without those flags. but when we have the flag off the old implementation is used which is more optimized than the new opcode/encoder friendly implementation. correct me if i'm wrong. i'll leave the discussion to you guys, just move it fast before it's too late. thanks