-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13k
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
Use ecx for const-prop local storage #62012
Conversation
This moves us closer to just using `InterpCx` for interpretation.
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.
r=me with @Centril's and my nits addressed
501f510
to
c686130
Compare
@bors try let's see how this impacts perf |
Use ecx for const-prop local storage r? @oli-obk
@rust-timer build dcd84aa |
Success: Queued dcd84aa with parent 56a12b2, comparison URL. |
☀️ Try build successful - checks-travis |
Finished benchmarking try commit dcd84aa, comparison URL. |
@bors try |
⌛ Trying commit cef4561c9ac8017e502a040cba083973097bff2a with merge b9376e62aea7c07ac50bf6929abf4931611b10a9... |
@rust-timer build b9376e62aea7c07ac50bf6929abf4931611b10a9 |
Success: Queued b9376e62aea7c07ac50bf6929abf4931611b10a9 with parent d4d5d67, comparison URL. |
☀️ Try build successful - checks-travis |
Finished benchmarking try commit b9376e62aea7c07ac50bf6929abf4931611b10a9, comparison URL. |
That didn't really help. I'm reverting that. |
cef4561
to
c686130
Compare
@oli-obk Are you ok with the performance? |
Yes, I believe now that we can start reusing const eval logic, we can improve the readability of the const propagator enough to warrant the perf regression. I also think that some of these reuse-changes will improve perf or at least expose perf problems in const eval that we can then address. @bors r+ |
📌 Commit c686130 has been approved by |
Use ecx for const-prop local storage r? @oli-obk
☀️ Test successful - checks-travis, status-appveyor |
r? @oli-obk