On 2014/09/04 10:25:05, titzer wrote:
On 2014/09/04 09:07:18, Yang wrote:
> https://codereview.chromium.org/543643002/diff/1/src/compiler.cc
> File src/compiler.cc (right):
>
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/543643002/diff/1/src/compiler.cc#newcode1251
> src/compiler.cc:1251: CompilationInfoWithZone nested(function);
> at this point, if deopt support is not enabled, we will end up
recompiling
the
> unoptimized code again in OptimizedCompileJob::CreateGraph. I think we
can
> simply remove this DCHECK and ensure that we have unoptimized code in
> OptimizedCompileJob::CreateGraph.
>
> It seems to me that OptimizedCompileJob::CreateGraph requires scope info
before
> it ensure we have deopt support in the unoptimized code. But I think we
could
> change the order: first ensure that we have unoptimized code with deopt
> support;then do whatever we need that requires scope info.
>
> Alternatively, when we compile unoptimized here, enable deopt support so
that
we
> don't have to recompile unoptimized later.
Nice catch. I've enabled deoptimization support when doing the unoptimized
compile, which should avoid the first problem you mentioned.
In general I think we need a deeper refactoring here that cleans up the
evolution of SharedFunctions, JSFunctions, and the CompilationInfo
through the
pipeline.
Given that, I don't want to hatchetize this code more than necessary at
the
moment.
lgtm.
https://codereview.chromium.org/543643002/
--
--
v8-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "v8-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
