[llvm-commits] [llvm] r117667 - in /llvm/trunk: include/llvm/ include/llvm/CodeGen/ include/llvm/Target/ lib/CodeGen/ lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/ lib/Target/ARM/ lib/Target/Alpha/ lib/Target/Blackfin/ lib/Target/CBackend/ lib/Target/CellSPU/ lib/Ta

[Chris Lattner]

On Nov 1, 2010, at 1:23 PM, John Thompson wrote:

> I did some investigation into some sizes, with the following results.

John,

Inline asm is not common enough that we care about optimizing its compile time.

> Question 1:
>  
> From the above, it appears that reducing the SmallVector sizes to the intermediate size used will get the visitInline stack frame size down to a bit less than 16K.  So, would having the still somewhat largish 14.5K stack frame be better than having the dynamic allocations otherwise done with vector?  I'm thinking yes, because the heap activity is probably slower and fragments memory.

Please just use vector.

> 
> Question 2:
>  
> If we wanted to look deeper into this, we'd probably want to look at timing and heap activity.  I see that there is a Timer class that could be used for measuring timing.  I didn't see a mechanism for tracking memory usage, i.e the total allocations and frees, and peak memory usage.  Is there something like this in there?

Nope, but you can use the profiling tools available to your system.  There is no specific need to build this stuff into LLVM itself.

-Chris