On 05/05/2012 02:32 AM, Josh Triplett wrote:
On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 03:30:21PM -0700, Christopher Li wrote:
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Konrad Eisele<eiselekd@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
make C=2:
original sparse:
real 17m54.997s
user 15m25.181s
sys 2m11.281s
decpp-sparse from "git clone git://git.code.sf.net/p/decpp/code decpp "
real 18m29.748s
user 16m18.155s
sys 2m13.221s
But decpp is not written with performance in common cases in mind.
The 2 runs probably also depend on other factors too.
I cant think that 4 bytes extra for each token can have a big impact,
if I would implement it that way (it is not in decpp).
The deal breaker is not able to free token list if other program using
sparse don't need it.
From the top of token.h:
/*
* Basic tokenization structures. NOTE! Those tokens had better
* be pretty small, since we're going to keep them all in memory
* indefinitely.
Has that changed? If so, perhaps the comment needs fixing. If not, I
suspect the problem lies elsewhere; perhaps in the extra levels of
indirection introduced by the patch, rather than in the extra memory
usage.
The benchmarking of decpp's sparse is not based on the patch I sent,
rather decpp's sparse does a lot more tagging to every token with a lot
of extra data. And without performance in mind.Programmed with the
common cases performance in mind it shouldnt have an impact at all...
I think I understood Christophers suggestion now and migh implement
it that way..
-- Konrad
- Josh Triplett
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
