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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
JIT: profile updates for return merges and tail calls #48773
JIT: profile updates for return merges and tail calls #48773
Changes from 5 commits
d78d2e7
ccac6e4
899dda1
33870e6
581f923
a8bda5f
7569715
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
Large diffs are not rendered by default.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I wonder if all this new code (or some of it?) should be extracted to a
fgUpdateTailcallProfileWeights
or similar?In fact, I wonder if most/all of the profile weight maintenance should be extracted into functions in fgprofile.cpp instead of spread around the various bits of the code base.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I actually think it belongs with the transformation; this is an important part of the transformation and not some additional / optional side work.
In the (hopefully not too distant) future we'll always have profile weights on every block so some of the conditional guarding will go way.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should all these
0.0f
constants be someZERO_WEIGHT
define?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I believe the relevant define is
BB_ZERO_WEIGHT
. A quick regex suggests it's almost exactly as popular as the0
literal when used for comparisons withbbWeight
.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm somewhat ambivalent about the value of having
BB_ZERO_WEIGHT
andBB_UNITY_WEIGHT
since going forward we're quite unlikely to ever change them from 0.0f and 1.0f.But I suppose we should be consistent and perhaps the symbolic form calls more attention to itself.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Changed what I could easily find over to
BB_ZERO_WEIGHT
.