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
|