Skip to content

[IRGen] Narrow the “requires instantiation” bit for conformances. #20034

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

Merged

Conversation

DougGregor
Copy link
Member

The “requires instantiation” bit for protocol conformances that
might require runtime instantiation was set for essentially every
resilient conformance, so we would always be forced to create a
copy of the table. Narrow the “requires instantiation” bit to those
cases where there is something in the pattern that needs it to be
copied (for now, only associated type witnesses involving a type
parameter, which need to be cached differently). This optimizes
some narrow cases where we wouldn’t otherwise need a copy.

Make this function take a LinkEntity describing what we're creating a GOT
entry for, to simplify callers a bit.
The “requires instantiation” bit for protocol conformances that
might require runtime instantiation was set for essentially every
resilient conformance, so we would always be forced to create a
copy of the table. Narrow the “requires instantiation” bit to those
cases where there is something in the pattern that needs it to be
copied (for now, only associated type witnesses involving a type
parameter, which need to be cached differently). This optimizes
some narrow cases where we wouldn’t otherwise need a copy.
@DougGregor
Copy link
Member Author

@swift-ci please smoke test and merge

@DougGregor
Copy link
Member Author

@swift-ci please benchmark

@swift-ci swift-ci merged commit b017761 into swiftlang:master Oct 25, 2018
@DougGregor DougGregor deleted the conformance-requires-instantiation branch October 25, 2018 05:09
@swift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

Build comment file:

No performance and code size changes

How to read the data The tables contain differences in performance which are larger than 8% and differences in code size which are larger than 1%.

If you see any unexpected regressions, you should consider fixing the regressions before you merge the PR.

Noise: Sometimes the performance results (not code size!) contain false alarms. Unexpected regressions which are marked with '(?)' are probably noise. If you see regressions which you cannot explain you can try to run the benchmarks again. If regressions still show up, please consult with the performance team (@eeckstein).

Hardware Overview
  Model Name: Mac Pro
  Model Identifier: MacPro6,1
  Processor Name: 12-Core Intel Xeon E5
  Processor Speed: 2.7 GHz
  Number of Processors: 1
  Total Number of Cores: 12
  L2 Cache (per Core): 256 KB
  L3 Cache: 30 MB
  Memory: 64 GB

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants