-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 34
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Call optimization #554
Call optimization #554
Conversation
Rebased this locally on #562, much more easier to read it grouped with execute. |
c2d6235
to
e70c686
Compare
lib/fizzy/execute.cpp
Outdated
assert(stack.size() >= num_args); | ||
span<const Value> call_args{stack.rend() - num_args, num_args}; | ||
|
||
const auto ret = execute(instance, func_idx, call_args.begin(), depth + 1); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actually, why do we have both .data()
and .begin()
when they point to the same thing?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not in std::span
.
e70c686
to
e0d1d78
Compare
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #554 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 98.25% 98.25%
=======================================
Files 63 63
Lines 9224 9231 +7
=======================================
+ Hits 9063 9070 +7
Misses 161 161 |
I think we were just lucky with #552, because now whatever I change around invoke I get 10% regression. The same story is in #574. |
5c601fc
to
9eaffe6
Compare
Replaced by #602. The remaining code copy has no effect. |
Results may be wrong as some benchmarks don't use calls.Confirmed for GCC10/LTO.