Re: faster queueing

On Wed, 24 Feb 2016 11:52:09 +0100
Felix Salfelder <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 09:07:48AM +0100, Felix Salfelder wrote:
> > indeed, in -uf there's a "precalc_last()" call after setup(cmd) in
> > s__init.cc... iirc due to some issues with temperature dependency. need
> > to recheck...  
> 
> fixed and backported the fix. see the precalc_last branch on savannah.

Do you have some test cases that demonstrate the problem, and that it
is fixed?

Doing a code walk-through ..  I see the problem, but this patch doesn't
fix it.  In some cases, temperature is handled in precalc_first().

I think a better change to the code is to not use the flags, but
instead move precalc_last() to always happen after setup().

Then also revisit the decisions about what is in precalc_first() vs
precalc_last().

From the wiki ...

>>>>>Some values must be calculated before determining structure. These
>>>>>go in precalc_first.

>>>>>Some values must be calculated after structure is determined.
>>>>>These go in precalc_last.

>>>>>Some values don't matter whether they are calculated before or
>>>>>after structure is determined. It strictly doesn't matter whether
>>>>>they are in precalc_first or precalc_last. By convention,
>>>>>evaluation of parameter expressions goes in precalc_first,
>>>>>calculation of other values that are done only once goes in
>>>>>precalc_last. 

The choice "by convention" is probably wrong.  It probably should be
that unless the calculations are needed before expand() and setup(), it
they should be in precalc_last().  A lot of devices need to change.