On 2013/09/18 10:59:32, rmcilroy wrote:
> IIUC this is a glorified way to store exactly one bit of information,
namely
> whether a code object is freshly generated and has never been aged
before.
> Wouldn't it be easier to store that bit of information in the code
object
> header? This could spare us from adding a NOP to every single method
prologue.
> Also it would keep platform specific changes to a minimum.
This is a good point. I think it made sense storing this bit of
information
in
the pre-existing nop on ARM, but was never happy with the added nop's in
ia32/x64 code. I've reworked this to use a bit in the code object, but
only
for
FUNCTION types (I'm assuming if get around to optimizing a function then
there
is less chance it will only be run once and so benefit for preaging).
Currently we still don't flush optimized code, so adding the bit to
OPTIMIZED_FUNCTION as well wouldn't make any difference right now. That
being
said, flushing of optimized code has been on our agenda for ages, and we
shouldn't build anything into the systems that makes flushing of optimized
code
less powerful compared to unoptimized code.
https://codereview.chromium.org/23480031/
--
--
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/groups/opt_out.
