non-inlined VM.

PhiHo Hoang phiho.hoang at rogers.com
Sun Jul 20 19:44:00 UTC 2003


Hi John.

    Thanks for the stats.

    What would you suggest for a compromised speed/size
    optimisation (taking into account the sizes of the routines) ?

    Cheers,

    PhiHo.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John M McIntosh" <johnmci at mac.com>
To: <squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2003 5:17 PM
Subject: non-inlined VM. 


> For the curious, where the time goes running the macrobenchmarks with a  
> VM built without inlining.
> This breaks out better the 40% or so numbers we see in interpret() in  
> the inlined version.
> 
> 14.2% fetchNextBytecode 
> 11.9% interpret (40% of that 11.9% is taken resolving the case  
> statement)
> 4.4% fetchByte (3.6% of this is via fetchNextByteCode)
> 3.9% internalActivateNewMethod 
> 3.4% internalFetchContextRegisters 
> 3.4% fetchPointerofObject 
> 2.5% internalStackValue 
> 2.4% internalPush 
> 2.2% startField 
> 1.9% internalExecuteNewMethod 
> 1.8% booleanCheat 
> 1.7% fetchClassOf 
> 1.6% lookupInMethodCacheSelclass 
> 1.5% pushTemporaryVariable 
> 1.3% upward 
> 1.3% headerType 
> 1.3% startObj 
> 1.2% instantiateSmallClasssizeInBytes 
> 1.1% internalStoreContextRegisters 
> 1.1% oopFromChunk 
> 1.1% quickFetchIntegerofObject 
> 1.1% storePointerUncheckedofObjectwithValue 
> 1.1% remapFieldsAndClassOf 
> 1.0% internalPop 
> 1.0% markAndTrace 
> 1.0% internalStackTop 
> 
> 
> --
> ======================================================================== 
> ===
> John M. McIntosh <johnmci at smalltalkconsulting.com> 1-800-477-2659
> Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd.  http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com
> ======================================================================== 
> ===
> 
> 



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list