[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [RFC] Implement C++ One Definition Rule for struct, class and union
- To: dwz@sourceware.org, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>, Mark Wielaard <mark@klomp.org>
- Subject: Re: [RFC] Implement C++ One Definition Rule for struct, class and union
- From: Tom de Vries <tdevries@suse.de>
- Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2019 23:04:37 +0100
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- Autocrypt: addr=tdevries@suse.de; keydata= xsBNBF0ltCcBCADDhsUnMMdEXiHFfqJdXeRvgqSEUxLCy/pHek88ALuFnPTICTwkf4g7uSR7 HvOFUoUyu8oP5mNb4VZHy3Xy8KRZGaQuaOHNhZAT1xaVo6kxjswUi3vYgGJhFMiLuIHdApoc u5f7UbV+egYVxmkvVLSqsVD4pUgHeSoAcIlm3blZ1sDKviJCwaHxDQkVmSsGXImaAU+ViJ5l CwkvyiiIifWD2SoOuFexZyZ7RUddLosgsO0npVUYbl6dEMq2a5ijGF6/rBs1m3nAoIgpXk6P TCKlSWVW6OCneTaKM5C387972qREtiArTakRQIpvDJuiR2soGfdeJ6igGA1FZjU+IsM5ABEB AAHNH1RvbSBkZSBWcmllcyA8dGRldnJpZXNAc3VzZS5kZT7CwKsEEwEIAD4WIQSsnSe5hKbL MK1mGmjuhV2rbOJEoAUCXSW0JwIbAwUJA8JnAAULCQgHAgYVCgkICwIEFgIDAQIeAQIXgAAh CRDuhV2rbOJEoBYhBKydJ7mEpsswrWYaaO6FXats4kSgc48H/Ra2lq5p3dHsrlQLqM7N68Fo eRDf3PMevXyMlrCYDGLVncQwMw3O/AkousktXKQ42DPJh65zoXB22yUt8m0g12xkLax98KFJ 5NyUloa6HflLl+wQL/uZjIdNUQaHQLw3HKwRMVi4l0/Jh/TygYG1Dtm8I4o708JS4y8GQxoQ UL0z1OM9hyM3gI2WVTTyprsBHy2EjMOu/2Xpod95pF8f90zBLajy6qXEnxlcsqreMaqmkzKn 3KTZpWRxNAS/IH3FbGQ+3RpWkNGSJpwfEMVCeyK5a1n7yt1podd1ajY5mA1jcaUmGppqx827 8TqyteNe1B/pbiUt2L/WhnTgW1NC1QDOwE0EXSW0JwEIAM99H34Bu4MKM7HDJVt864MXbx7B 1M93wVlpJ7Uq+XDFD0A0hIal028j+h6jA6bhzWto4RUfDl/9mn1StngNVFovvwtfzbamp6+W pKHZm9X5YvlIwCx131kTxCNDcF+/adRW4n8CU3pZWYmNVqhMUiPLxElA6QhXTtVBh1RkjCZQ Kmbd1szvcOfaD8s+tJABJzNZsmO2hVuFwkDrRN8Jgrh92a+yHQPd9+RybW2l7sJv26nkUH5Z 5s84P6894ebgimcprJdAkjJTgprl1nhgvptU5M9Uv85Pferoh2groQEAtRPlCGrZ2/2qVNe9 XJfSYbiyedvApWcJs5DOByTaKkcAEQEAAcLAkwQYAQgAJhYhBKydJ7mEpsswrWYaaO6FXats 4kSgBQJdJbQnAhsMBQkDwmcAACEJEO6FXats4kSgFiEErJ0nuYSmyzCtZhpo7oVdq2ziRKD3 twf7BAQBZ8TqR812zKAD7biOnWIJ0McV72PFBxmLIHp24UVe0ZogtYMxSWKLg3csh0yLVwc7 H3vldzJ9AoK3Qxp0Q6K/rDOeUy3HMqewQGcqrsRRh0NXDIQk5CgSrZslPe47qIbe3O7ik/MC q31FNIAQJPmKXX25B115MMzkSKlv4udfx7KdyxHrTSkwWZArLQiEZj5KG4cCKhIoMygPTA3U yGaIvI/BGOtHZ7bEBVUCFDFfOWJ26IOCoPnSVUvKPEOH9dv+sNy7jyBsP5QxeTqwxC/1ZtNS DUCSFQjqA6bEGwM22dP8OUY6SC94x1G81A9/xbtm9LQxKm0EiDH8KBMLfQ==
- Cc: Michael Matz <matz@suse.de>
- Delivered-to: listarch-dwz@sourceware.org
- Delivered-to: mailing list dwz@sourceware.org
- In-reply-to: <8fdf524a-8cdb-8f9e-3b02-104a07f3f072@suse.de>
- List-help: <mailto:dwz-help@sourceware.org>
- List-id: <dwz.sourceware.org>
- List-post: <mailto:dwz@sourceware.org>
- List-subscribe: <mailto:dwz-subscribe@sourceware.org>
- Mailing-list: contact dwz-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
- References: <8fdf524a-8cdb-8f9e-3b02-104a07f3f072@suse.de>
- Sender: dwz-owner@sourceware.org
- User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.2.1
On 12-11-2019 14:56, Tom de Vries wrote:
> V. Effect
>
> We use a cc1 executable to generate executables compressed with no odr,
> --odr and --odr-unify:
> ...
> $ dwz -l50000000 cc1 -o 1
> $ dwz -l50000000 cc1 -o 2 --odr
> $ dwz -l50000000 cc1 -o 3 --odr-unify
> ...
>
> Then we can inspect the differences:
> ...
> $ diff.sh cc1 1
> .debug_info red: 44.80% 111527248 61570632
> .debug_abbrev red: 40.16% 1722726 1030935
> .debug_str red: 0% 6609355 6609355
> total red: 42.26% 119859329 69210922
> $ diff.sh cc1 2
> .debug_info red: 55.16% 111527248 50019425
> .debug_abbrev red: 68.13% 1722726 549035
> .debug_str red: 0% 6609355 6609355
> total red: 52.30% 119859329 57177815
> $ diff.sh cc1 3
> .debug_info red: 58.18% 111527248 46649959
> .debug_abbrev red: 79.57% 1722726 352080
> .debug_str red: 0% 6609355 6609355
> total red: 55.28% 119859329 53611394
> ...
>
> So, the .debug_info and .debug_abbrev sections are reduced in size by:
> - by 42% when not using odr,
> - by 52% when using --odr, and
> - by 55% when using --odr-unify.
>
> VI. Cost
>
> Using the same cc1 example as in V, we can see the cost of the optimization:
At V, I correctly used -l50000000 (l lower-case), but here I accidentally
used -L50000000 (L upper-case). Which means low-mem mode kicked in and
disabled the optimization midway, so the time and mem results presented here
earlier were off.
Let's try again:
...
$ time.sh dwz -l50000000 cc1 -o 1
maxmem: 1341888
real: 7.09
user: 6.90
system: 0.18
$ time.sh dwz -l50000000 cc1 -o 2 --odr
maxmem: 1336612
real: 18.72
user: 18.54
system: 0.17
$ time.sh dwz -l50000000 cc1 -o 3 --odr-unify
maxmem: 1336216
real: 13.76
user: 13.57
system: 0.18
...
> It's good to note though that without the patch series applied, we use less
> memory, due to the struct dw_die not having the copy/origin fields:
And here again:
...
$ time.sh dwz -lnone cc1 -o 1
maxmem: 1179928
real: 6.98
user: 6.83
system: 0.14
...
Thanks,
- Tom