FAQ
With this patch applied:

--- prog list "other" ---
0000 (/home/dfc/src/other.go:5) TEXT other+0(SB),$0-0
0001 (/home/dfc/src/other.go:6) MOVW $1,R2
0002 (/home/dfc/src/other.go:7) MOVW $buf+0(SB),R0
0003 (/home/dfc/src/other.go:7) MOVW $0(R0),R1
0004 (/home/dfc/src/other.go:7) MOVW $32,R3
0005 (/home/dfc/src/other.go:7) CMP R3,R2,
0006 (/home/dfc/src/other.go:7) BLO ,8(APC)
0007 (/home/dfc/src/other.go:7) BL ,runtime.panicindex+0(SB)
0008 (/home/dfc/src/other.go:7) ADD R2,R1,R0
0009 (/home/dfc/src/other.go:7) MOVW $1,R1
0010 (/home/dfc/src/other.go:7) MOVBU R1,R1
0011 (/home/dfc/src/other.go:7) MOVBU R1,0(R0)
0012 (/home/dfc/src/other.go:8) RET ,
pando(~/src) % go build -gcflags -S other.go
# command-line-arguments

Without this patch.

--- prog list "other" ---
0000 (/home/dfc/src/other.go:5) TEXT other+0(SB),$0-0
0001 (/home/dfc/src/other.go:6) MOVW $1,R1
0002 (/home/dfc/src/other.go:7) MOVW $buf+0(SB),R0
0003 (/home/dfc/src/other.go:7) MOVW $32,R2
0004 (/home/dfc/src/other.go:7) CMP R2,R1,
0005 (/home/dfc/src/other.go:7) BLO ,7(APC)
0006 (/home/dfc/src/other.go:7) BL ,runtime.panicindex+0(SB)
0007 (/home/dfc/src/other.go:7) ADD R1,R0
0008 (/home/dfc/src/other.go:7) MOVW $1,R1
0009 (/home/dfc/src/other.go:7) MOVBU R1,R1
0010 (/home/dfc/src/other.go:7) MOVBU R1,0(R0)
0011 (/home/dfc/src/other.go:8) RET ,

This probably explains why some of the benchmarks got slower.

https://codereview.appspot.com/6621061/

Search Discussions

  • Remyoudompheng at Oct 10, 2012 at 6:22 am

    On 2012/10/10 03:26:16, dfc wrote:
    This probably explains why some of the benchmarks got slower.
    Probably. I suspect that the changes could affect also the number of
    temporaries pinned to the stack. I would say it can improve a lot by
    adding the ONAME case to igen, using igen in cgen and importing the
    componentgen function.


    http://codereview.appspot.com/6621061/
  • Remyoudompheng at Oct 10, 2012 at 6:58 pm
    Dave (or anybody else), can you try and benchmark CL6639058:
    http://codereview.appspot.com/6639058

    It adds optimizations on top on this CL and I would try to know if it
    addresses the slowdowns. If it does, then the ARM part of this patch is
    not a problem and the optimization can be submitted in a second step.

    http://codereview.appspot.com/6621061/
  • Remyoudompheng at Oct 10, 2012 at 7:04 pm
    Hello golang-dev@googlegroups.com, dave@cheney.net (cc:
    golang-dev@googlegroups.com),

    Please take another look.


    http://codereview.appspot.com/6621061/

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
groupgolang-dev @
categoriesgo
postedOct 10, '12 at 3:26a
activeOct 10, '12 at 7:04p
posts4
users2
websitegolang.org

2 users in discussion

Remyoudompheng: 3 posts Dave: 1 post

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2022 Grokbase