[PATCH] D144369: [InstCombine] Remove early constant fold

[Vitaly Buka via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

vitalybuka added a comment.

In D144369#4151553 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D144369#4151553>, @goldstein.w.n wrote:

> In D144369#4151551 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D144369#4151551>, @vitalybuka wrote:
>
>> In D144369#4151125 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D144369#4151125>, @vitalybuka wrote:
>>
>>> On branch with ubsan does not show meaningful difference :(
>>> https://llvm-compile-time-tracker.com/compare.php?from=a332a5159821071b71b0db09924952bb50b85033&to=2e565f60903052500d2a12f8e56a0efc7adc6f69&stat=instructions%3Au
>>
>> it would be nice to compile clang itself as benchmark, but I guess it's significantly more load for tracker
>
> Could you just time the bootstrap tests and if they have an extreme regression fail the test?

actually. in this case I can, the current UI is enough

  after revert:     7:31 stage2/ubsan build
  before revert: 1:19:07 stage2/ubsan build



In D144369#4151553 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D144369#4151553>, @goldstein.w.n wrote:

> In D144369#4151551 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D144369#4151551>, @vitalybuka wrote:
>
>> In D144369#4151125 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D144369#4151125>, @vitalybuka wrote:
>>
>>> On branch with ubsan does not show meaningful difference :(
>>> https://llvm-compile-time-tracker.com/compare.php?from=a332a5159821071b71b0db09924952bb50b85033&to=2e565f60903052500d2a12f8e56a0efc7adc6f69&stat=instructions%3Au
>>
>> it would be nice to compile clang itself as benchmark, but I guess it's significantly more load for tracker
>
> Could you just time the bootstrap tests and if they have an extreme regression fail the test?

Thanks, looks just "time" is good enough. User time is quite consistent. Original version of the patch increased time ~20%, reapply is close to 0%
https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/238/builds/1576


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D144369/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D144369