now that the algebraic/folding opts are gone, we can do this in one pass for a
2.5% speedup:
N Min Max Median Avg Stddev
x 50 0.44474704 0.46750433 0.45455258 0.45446569 0.0044727894
+ 50 0.43149892 0.45173984 0.44252267 0.44295575 0.0045621814
Difference at 95.0% confidence
-0.0115099 +/- 0.00179263
-2.53263% +/- 0.394447%
(Student's t, pooled s = 0.00451771)
Signed-off-by: Alyssa Rosenzweig <alyssa@rosenzweig.io>
No longer needed.
The total difference from the beginning of this series (all the prep work to
make this change possible) plus this commit is a modest 0.4% win.
N Min Max Median Avg Stddev
x 100 0.4472467 0.46646308 0.45708424 0.45713057 0.0040838243
+ 100 0.44707586 0.46581227 0.45479448 0.45509309 0.0037548573
Difference at 95.0% confidence
-0.00203748 +/- 0.00108734
-0.445711% +/- 0.237862%
(Student's t, pooled s = 0.00392279)
...in addition to a net deletion of 144 lines of code.
Signed-off-by: Alyssa Rosenzweig <alyssa@rosenzweig.io>
these can't work due to architectural limitations. they could be ported to
post-RA passes, I think, but having them here now is not helping anything and
they're in the way.
Signed-off-by: Alyssa Rosenzweig <alyssa@rosenzweig.io>
combined results on node from this and the previous commit:
N Min Max Median Avg Stddev
x 50 0.44433582 0.46988457 0.45344824 0.45320041 0.0043288623
+ 50 0.4385365 0.46615359 0.45026179 0.44996216 0.0045742233
Difference at 95.0% confidence
-0.00323825 +/- 0.00176704
-0.71453% +/- 0.389903%
(Student's t, pooled s = 0.00445323)
Signed-off-by: Alyssa Rosenzweig <alyssa@rosenzweig.io>
This is changes the interface of CodeBuffer to that of a partially persistent
data structure based on reference counting:
- Exactly one CodeBuffer is now designated as "active", which means data can
be *appended* to it
- Lossy modifications to the active CodeBuffer will not invalidate any data
in use by other threads, which enables save sharing across threads
- Instead, such lossy modifications trigger a new "version" of the data in
the modifying thread. Old versions of the CodeBuffer persist as read-only
data for use by the other threads.
- The other threads can update their version of the CodeBuffer. This will
decrease the reference count and eventually trigger deallocation of the
old version
This data isn't really a cache, since the JIT is directly responsible of
writing its contents. Instead it be considered the source to populate the
L1/L2 caches from.
Furthermore, splitting off this data allows it to be shared across threads
in the future without affecting L1/L2 caches.
as a simple post-RA peephole. much much easier to do post-RA than pre-RA.
This isn't a post-RA /pass/ in the traditional sense... it's done while
assigning registers to coalesce the passes over the IR, since we pay per-pass
and we can merge the walks over the IR.
Closes: #4480
Signed-off-by: Alyssa Rosenzweig <alyssa@rosenzweig.io>
lots of instructions only exist for RA, so RA can garbage collect them before
post-RA passes (including the JIT) deals with them. this simplifies our life
now, and makes post-RA passes a LOT simpler for little cost.
Signed-off-by: Alyssa Rosenzweig <alyssa@rosenzweig.io>
Ryan Houdek