vgvassilev wrote: > > > > This is a great way to start a new year ;) > > > > The phab link is https://reviews.llvm.org/D41416. > > > > In general I was wondering could we simplify the implementation by > > > > loading the specialization hash table upon module load. That should be > > > > relatively cheap as we will read 2 integers per specialization. > > > > Perhaps we should put both patches together and that'd allow us to test > > > > them if they are on par with https://reviews.llvm.org/D41416 which we > > > > use downstream. > > > > Thanks for working on this! > > > > > > > > > Hi Vassilev, for testing purpose I sent > > > https://github.com/ChuanqiXu9/llvm-project/tree/LoadSpecializationUpdatesLazily. > > > I didn't create stacked review since I feel a standalone branch may be > > > sufficient. > > > > > > @ChuanqiXu9, I'd prefer to review both patches at the same time. Otherwise > > we risk of missing some important details. > > Got it. I can try to create a stacked review. But from I know about the > status quo stacked review now, it will require us to lost the current > contexnt... > > And it will still be pretty valuable if you can test this with your internal > workloads, then may be we can find something pretty important in the high > level before going into the details. I've tested this in our local workloads, > and it looks good and the performance improvements remains. But I know our > uses about modules may be not so complex like yours.
I would just push the second commit here. It should be good enough. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/76774 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
