[PATCH] D24976: [thinlto] Don't decay threshold for hot callsites

[Teresa Johnson via llvm-commits]

On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 5:54 PM, Piotr Padlewski <piotr.padlewski at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Prazek added a comment.
>
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D24976#556227, @tejohnson wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D24976#556151, @Prazek wrote:
> >
> > > I have some initial results. It looks like because inliner doesn't
> know how to inline hot callsites, then most of the SPEC benchmarks have the
> same binary as current trunk (with hot heuristic).
> > >  But on the google branch with smarter inliner there is clear win in
> povray, about +0.5% compared to current trunk with hot heuristic, over all
> other benchmarks that produced different binary are not much different.
> > >
> > > So the question is - should I temporary set the hot-evolution-factor
> to the same as normal evolution factor? So this way We won't import more
> functions that inliner won't inline, and then when new inliner will make it
> to trunk, to switch it to 1.0
> >
> >
> > Can you enable your importing stats to see how many extra funcs we
> import in trunk?
>
>
> These are the numbers of imported functions for povray
> trunk_without_hot      trunk   trunk_hot_chaians
> 1738                   1863     1876
>
> So we import 13 functions more. This is kinda expected, there should not
> be many hot chains
>

That's fine for povray - but do you have the data for the other benchmarks?
Wondering in general how many more funcs are imported across the benchmarks.

Phab is down, but I downloaded the latest patch: LGTM


>
>
> https://reviews.llvm.org/D24976
>
>
>
>


-- 
Teresa Johnson |  Software Engineer |  tejohnson at google.com |  408-460-2413
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20160929/5847965f/attachment.html>