[llvm-dev] RFC: Improving performance of HashString
Scott Smith via llvm-dev
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Mon Apr 24 17:37:53 PDT 2017
I've been working on improving the startup performance of lldb, and ran
into an issue with llvm::HashString. It works a character at a time, which
creates a long dependency chain in the processor. On the other hand, the
function is very short, which probably works well for short identifiers.
I don't know how the mix of identifier length seen by lldb compares with
that seen by llvm/clang; I imagine they're pretty similar.
I have to different proposals, and wanted to gauge which would be preferred:
1. Use xxhash instead.
2. Use the Intel native crc32q instruction to process 8 bytes at a time,
then fall back to byte at a time. Non sse 4.2 capable processors (either
early or non Intel/AMD x86) would use the existing algorithm, or possibly
For my test, both result in approximately the same # of cycles (within
#1 uses 3+% more instructions.
#2 requires (realistically) runtime detection of cpu capabilities, because
distributions would want generic x86/x86_64 compatible binaries, not
separate binaries per cpu feature.
I'm leaning toward #1 despite the instruction increase. My only worry is
the effect on compile times for code with lots of short identifiers. I
haven't tested that though (and I don't have a suitable benchmark suite for
that) so for all I know I'm worrying about nothing.
FYI the improvement is approximately 11.5% reduction in cycles for my lldb
test (b main, run, quit), so IMO it's pretty significant.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the llvm-dev