llvm dev - Nov 2018 - [cfe-dev] llvm.org pre-built clang significantly slower than apple/xcode clang

I don’t think Apple disable assertion on the release build. I remember having
clang and llvm crash because of assertion failure regularly at some point in the
past.
Nowadays, it is far more unusual to get a clang crash, so I can’t tell, but I
doubt they change the configuration.
> Le 20 nov. 2018 à 16:32, Jack Howarth via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at
lists.llvm.org> a écrit :
> 
> The obvious question is whether the llvm.org <http://llvm.org/>
builds are using -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS:OFF -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE:STRING=Release
-DLLVM_LINK_LLVM_DYLIB:BOOL=ON which would improve the load time of the compiler
by combining all of the llvm libs into a single dylib and would eliminate the
speed decrease from using the default use of assertions in the built compiler.
>        Jack
> 
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 6:56 AM Tobias Hieta via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at
lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
> Hello LLVM/Clang developers,
> 
> We recently switched to use the same clang version on all our platforms.
This included switching from apple-clang from xcode to a pre-built binary we
downloaded from llvm.org <http://llvm.org/>. We noticed that this actually
came with a pretty big performance regression in compile times.
> 
> If we do the simplest test program like this:
> 
> #include <string>
> #include <iostream>
> int main()
> {
>     std::cout << "Hello world" << std::endl;
> }
> 
> and compile that with Xcode Clang (Xcode 10.1 apple-clang
clang-1000.11.45.5):
> clang++ test.cpp -o test  0.31s user 0.06s system 97% cpu 0.380 total
> 
> with clang 7 binaries found on llvm.org <http://llvm.org/> 7.0.0:
> ~/Downloads/clang+llvm-7.0.0-x86_64-apple-darwin/bin/clang++ -o test
test.cpp  0.53s user 0.11s system 62% cpu 1.032 total
> 
> If we now run that on our whole project:
> with xcode clang:
> 368.17s user 32.00s system 663% cpu 1:00.30 total
> 
> with clang 7:
> 423.31s user 31.65s system 662% cpu 1:08.69 total
> 
> That's a pretty hefty difference. Any ideas what can account for this
discrepancy? Does apple-clang contain any special patches or build flags that
differ a lot from the binaries on llvm.org <http://llvm.org/>?
> 
> I know about PGO - and I guess the best we could do is to get profile data
out of compiling my whole tree and use that when building clang - but this
process seems not very well documented and unsure if this would even help.
> 
> Thankful for any ideas or feedback.
> Tobias
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
<http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev>
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20181120/43149a93/attachment.html>

Jean-Daniel,
     The latest available release posted on their open source web site
argues that that they are disabling assertions in clang.

https://opensource.apple.com/source/clang/clang-800.0.42.1/Makefile.auto.html

     Jack

On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 5:21 PM Jean-Daniel <mailing at xenonium.com>
wrote:
> I don’t think Apple disable assertion on the release build. I remember
> having clang and llvm crash because of assertion failure regularly at some
> point in the past.
> Nowadays, it is far more unusual to get a clang crash, so I can’t tell,
> but I doubt they change the configuration.
>
> Le 20 nov. 2018 à 16:32, Jack Howarth via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at
lists.llvm.org>
> a écrit :
>
> The obvious question is whether the llvm.org builds are using
-DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS:OFF
> -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE:STRING=Release -DLLVM_LINK_LLVM_DYLIB:BOOL=ON which
> would improve the load time of the compiler by combining all of the llvm
> libs into a single dylib and would eliminate the speed decrease from using
> the default use of assertions in the built compiler.
> Jack
>
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 6:56 AM Tobias Hieta via cfe-dev <
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> Hello LLVM/Clang developers,
>>
>> We recently switched to use the same clang version on all our
platforms.
>> This included switching from apple-clang from xcode to a pre-built
binary
>> we downloaded from llvm.org. We noticed that this actually came with a
>> pretty big performance regression in compile times.
>>
>> If we do the simplest test program like this:
>>
>> #include <string>
>> #include <iostream>
>> int main()
>> {
>>     std::cout << "Hello world" << std::endl;
>> }
>>
>> and compile that with Xcode Clang (Xcode 10.1 apple-clang
>> clang-1000.11.45.5):
>> clang++ test.cpp -o test  0.31s user 0.06s system 97% cpu 0.380 total
>>
>> with clang 7 binaries found on llvm.org 7.0.0:
>> ~/Downloads/clang+llvm-7.0.0-x86_64-apple-darwin/bin/clang++ -o test
>> test.cpp  0.53s user 0.11s system 62% cpu 1.032 total
>>
>> If we now run that on our whole project:
>> with xcode clang:
>> 368.17s user 32.00s system 663% cpu 1:00.30 total
>>
>> with clang 7:
>> 423.31s user 31.65s system 662% cpu 1:08.69 total
>>
>> That's a pretty hefty difference. Any ideas what can account for
this
>> discrepancy? Does apple-clang contain any special patches or build
flags
>> that differ a lot from the binaries on llvm.org?
>>
>> I know about PGO - and I guess the best we could do is to get profile
>> data out of compiling my whole tree and use that when building clang -
but
>> this process seems not very well documented and unsure if this would
even
>> help.
>>
>> Thankful for any ideas or feedback.
>> Tobias
>> _______________________________________________
>> cfe-dev mailing list
>> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>>
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20181120/e5184a43/attachment.html>

Thank you for the correction. So they actually did change that at some point.
> Le 20 nov. 2018 à 23:54, Jack Howarth <howarth.mailing.lists at
gmail.com> a écrit :
> 
> Jean-Daniel,
>      The latest available release posted on their open source web site
argues that that they are disabling assertions in clang.
> 
>
https://opensource.apple.com/source/clang/clang-800.0.42.1/Makefile.auto.html
<https://opensource.apple.com/source/clang/clang-800.0.42.1/Makefile.auto.html>
> 
>      Jack
> 
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 5:21 PM Jean-Daniel <mailing at xenonium.com
<mailto:mailing at xenonium.com>> wrote:
> I don’t think Apple disable assertion on the release build. I remember
having clang and llvm crash because of assertion failure regularly at some point
in the past.
> Nowadays, it is far more unusual to get a clang crash, so I can’t tell, but
I doubt they change the configuration.
> 
>> Le 20 nov. 2018 à 16:32, Jack Howarth via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at
lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>> a écrit :
>> 
>> The obvious question is whether the llvm.org <http://llvm.org/>
builds are using -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS:OFF -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE:STRING=Release
-DLLVM_LINK_LLVM_DYLIB:BOOL=ON which would improve the load time of the compiler
by combining all of the llvm libs into a single dylib and would eliminate the
speed decrease from using the default use of assertions in the built compiler.
>>        Jack
>> 
>> On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 6:56 AM Tobias Hieta via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at
lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
>> Hello LLVM/Clang developers,
>> 
>> We recently switched to use the same clang version on all our
platforms. This included switching from apple-clang from xcode to a pre-built
binary we downloaded from llvm.org <http://llvm.org/>. We noticed that
this actually came with a pretty big performance regression in compile times.
>> 
>> If we do the simplest test program like this:
>> 
>> #include <string>
>> #include <iostream>
>> int main()
>> {
>>     std::cout << "Hello world" << std::endl;
>> }
>> 
>> and compile that with Xcode Clang (Xcode 10.1 apple-clang
clang-1000.11.45.5):
>> clang++ test.cpp -o test  0.31s user 0.06s system 97% cpu 0.380 total
>> 
>> with clang 7 binaries found on llvm.org <http://llvm.org/> 7.0.0:
>> ~/Downloads/clang+llvm-7.0.0-x86_64-apple-darwin/bin/clang++ -o test
test.cpp  0.53s user 0.11s system 62% cpu 1.032 total
>> 
>> If we now run that on our whole project:
>> with xcode clang:
>> 368.17s user 32.00s system 663% cpu 1:00.30 total
>> 
>> with clang 7:
>> 423.31s user 31.65s system 662% cpu 1:08.69 total
>> 
>> That's a pretty hefty difference. Any ideas what can account for
this discrepancy? Does apple-clang contain any special patches or build flags
that differ a lot from the binaries on llvm.org <http://llvm.org/>?
>> 
>> I know about PGO - and I guess the best we could do is to get profile
data out of compiling my whole tree and use that when building clang - but this
process seems not very well documented and unsure if this would even help.
>> 
>> Thankful for any ideas or feedback.
>> Tobias
>> _______________________________________________
>> cfe-dev mailing list
>> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
<http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cfe-dev mailing list
>> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
<http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev>
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20181121/633441d2/attachment.html>