George Rimar via llvm-dev
2016-Jan-15 23:26 UTC
[llvm-dev] HA: LLD benchmark results for all commits
>I created room above the first line so they don't overlap. This is probably better than moving the graph to another sheet because I think if I do, some of you do not notice that there's a graph at all.Ok, I also can`t understand where linker is going slower in table ? "C" column which is "Link time (seconds)" is lower and lower. Does it supposed to be inverted (1 - X) ? Best regards, George.
Rui Ueyama via llvm-dev
2016-Jan-15 23:36 UTC
[llvm-dev] LLD benchmark results for all commits
Well, from November 1st to the end of December, the linker got slower by about 10%, but you cannot attribute that decrease to any single change. That's the result of accumulation, and that's why I wrote it tends to getting slower. All the accumulation was offset by a single change, which is the string table optimization patch, though. On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 3:26 PM, George Rimar <grimar at accesssoftek.com> wrote:> >I created room above the first line so they don't overlap. This is > probably better than moving the graph to another sheet because I think if I > do, some of you do not notice that there's a graph at all. > Ok, I also can`t understand where linker is going slower in table ? "C" > column which is "Link time (seconds)" is lower and lower. Does it supposed > to be inverted (1 - X) ? > > Best regards, > George. > > >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160115/baf9ea32/attachment.html>
George Rimar via llvm-dev
2016-Jan-15 23:59 UTC
[llvm-dev] HA: LLD benchmark results for all commits
> Well, from November 1st to the end of December, the linker got slower by about 10%, but you cannot attribute that decrease to any single change. That's the result of accumulation, and that's why I wrote it tends to getting slower. All the accumulation was offset by a single change, which is the string table optimization patch, though.Ok. There are few wierds also. 257731 "[ELF/AArch64] Support R_AARCH64_LDST128_ABS_LO12_NC relocation." looks to have 0.425998862 link time what is greater than previous 0.415870616. I dont think its because of this lld changes. So i guess other llvm code also affects. Best regards, George.