AaronBallman wrote: > @cor3ntin @AaronBallman that doesn't look overwhelmingly bad to me (e.g. > before and after look the same?)
I may be misinterpreting the data, but doesn't this show a significant regression (numbers taken from the stress test): ``` -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- n time(i) total(B) useful-heap(B) extra-heap(B) stacks(B) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 186,864,557 3,485,296 3,336,946 95,382 52,968 2 477,143,082 6,980,720 6,693,115 219,853 67,752 ``` and ``` -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- n time(i) total(B) useful-heap(B) extra-heap(B) stacks(B) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 286,291,056 4,757,792 4,573,558 138,186 46,048 2 591,222,234 8,392,712 8,064,059 267,949 60,704 3 822,224,951 10,865,504 10,439,613 365,299 60,592 ``` It seems like we're taking significantly longer and using more heap space? https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/192080 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
