Displaying 2 results from an estimated 2 matches for "r209797".
Did you mean:
209797
2014 Aug 01
3
[LLVMdev] Recent compile time performance regressions
...st to a something that could go
> poorly would be r209798, but that commit doesn't seem plausible for a huge
> slowdown.
>
> I wonder if there is something weird going on with the bot...
209797-209799 regression is false positive, due to reverting perf back
to original timeit tool.(r209797)
However the multithreading stuff is real regression and I'm able to
reproduce same regression on my local build bots.
-Yi
2014 Aug 01
2
[LLVMdev] Recent compile time performance regressions
On 01/08/2014 22:07, Chandler Carruth wrote:
> Note that I've fixed one bad compile time regression quite recently, and
> we're bisecting to another one. We benchmarked the multithreading stuff
> pretty carefully, so I doubt its that. Have you tried reverting locally and
> reproducing?
Not really. It just saw this passing by and was wondering if it raised
some bells.
The