[darcs-users] darcs patch: optimize firstspace/firstnonspace to remove boxed retu...
dagit at codersbase.com
Thu Oct 1 16:33:51 UTC 2009
Could someone please review my patch?
Ian gave a general objection to MagicHash, but I don't think that was
intended as an actual review.
I'm not sure who should be looking at this.
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 2:48 PM, Jason Dagit <dagit at codersbase.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 3:37 AM, Ian Lynagh <igloo at earth.li> wrote:
>> On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 03:10:01PM -0700, Jason Dagit wrote:
>> > While profiling away on darcs I discovered that we create a lot of
>> > intermediate garbage while parsing due to what is otherwise a very,
>> > very small intermediate allocation.
>> > What maginfies this allocation into a problem is that we're allocating
>> > an int for each element of the bytestrings that we traverse with this
>> > function. GHC is unable to optimize this because in the IO monad it
>> > must return a boxed int instead of an unboxed int.
>> MagicHash should be avoided wherever possible, IMO.
>> Can you give a small, standalone program showing the problem and your
>> solution, please?
> I haven't been able to no. I tried several different things with toy
> examples. I wasn't really able to reproduce this. Perhaps if I worked from
> the darcs source, but then I think the functions I modified are pretty
> simple definitions so I don't think that's what you're looking for (or else
> you'd just look at the darcs source).
> Some things I do know:
> 1) adding inline for firstspace/firstnonspace without other changes doesn't
> make a difference.
> 2) refactoring firstspace/firstnonspace so that they are wrappers around a
> worker function and then inlining does reduce the allocations quite a bit
> for firstspace, but doesn't get rid of the CPU usage.
> 3) the patch I sent in makes firstspace stop appearing in the list of
> functions at the top of the .prof file (meaning, it no longer does a lot of
> allocations nor takes much CPU time).
> I think I miss-explained the problem previously. I was thinking it had
> more to do with the recursive call to firstspace but on further inspection
> (failing to construct a minimal example based on the recursive call), I'm
> not sure what causes the allocations. I do know that the total run time and
> total number of allocated bytes goes down so I don't think it's just a
> change in profiling accounting due to better inlining. It does seem to
> really solve the problem and other things I've tried do not solve it. I
> can't seem to reproduce it with a toy example.
> This function is only used within the module and it is heavily used.
> Perhaps this magic hash version is just closer to metal and works better for
> that reason.
> Sorry that I don't have better answers or explanations.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the darcs-users