relation summary #911
relation summary #911
Conversation
|
This change is |
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## dev #911 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 90.74% 90.55% -0.20%
==========================================
Files 94 94
Lines 13549 13578 +29
Branches 13549 13578 +29
==========================================
Hits 12295 12295
- Misses 1140 1169 +29
Partials 114 114 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
![github-actions[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/15368?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
⚠️ Performance Alert ⚠️
Possible performance regression was detected for benchmark.
Benchmark result of this commit is worse than the previous benchmark result exceeding threshold 2.
| Benchmark suite | Current: 1400ec6 | Previous: cd8b37b | Ratio |
|---|---|---|---|
merkle throughput/simd merkle |
27658225 ns/iter (± 670855) |
13712527 ns/iter (± 579195) |
2.02 |
This comment was automatically generated by workflow using github-action-benchmark.
CC: @shaharsamocha7
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reviewed 1 of 1 files at r1, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @ohad-starkware)
crates/prover/src/constraint_framework/relation_tracker.rs line 192 at r1 (raw file):
} type RelationInfo = (String, Vec<(Vec<M31>, M31)>);
Is there a non-destructive way to unify this, RelationEntry and RelationTrackerEntry?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @Alon-Ti)
crates/prover/src/constraint_framework/relation_tracker.rs line 192 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, Alon-Ti wrote…
Is there a non-destructive way to unify this,
RelationEntryandRelationTrackerEntry?
the relation tracker could sit with the logup stuff under some "lookup_utils" folder in the constraint(air) framework
ohad-starkware
changed the base branch from
ohad/relationeval
to
graphite-base/911
ohad-starkware
force-pushed
the
ohad/relation_summary
branch
from
4816a4a to
1400ec6
Compare
|
Previously, ohad-starkware (Ohad) wrote…
oh if you meant unifying to a single struct then no, this represents multiple entries that are not even from the same trace |
No description provided.