gh-106529: Split FOR_ITER_RANGE into uops - #106638
Merged
gvanrossum merged 8 commits intoJul 12, 2023
Merged
Conversation
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
Sorry, something went wrong.
11 tasks
gvanrossum
force-pushed
the
new-for-iter-uops
branch
from
0d33f29 to
002b033
Compare
July 11, 2023 23:10
(Plus a skipped cache entry.)
This was remarkably straightforward
gvanrossum
marked this pull request as ready for review
July 12, 2023 01:46
gvanrossum
force-pushed
the
new-for-iter-uops
branch
from
3bb46a4 to
6b8fb78
Compare
July 12, 2023 01:46
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
Author
|
I will fix the conflict and merge this. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
(I wasn't updating trace_length in this case.)
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
Author
|
New benchmark says it's no faster or slower (in Tier 1, that is). That's good news. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Reviewers
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Ignore the commit history, this is a pile of different experiments.
Benchmark says 1% slower. Now, that's for the version where the "is it exhausted?" check pushes a NULL onto the stack if it is, and the next value if it isn't, which isn't the latest design. So I'm not sure whether I care. If Mark likes the latest version I'll re-run the benchmarks.
(Benchmarking says nothing about the Tier 2 interpreter speed, since that's off except during a few tests.)