From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id SrNLDZ8/5mJcqR0AWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 31 Jul 2022 04:38:55 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 269CA1EA04; Sun, 31 Jul 2022 04:38:55 -0400 (EDT) Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=sourceware.org header.i=@sourceware.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=vY5UAra9; dkim-atps=neutral X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,RDNS_DYNAMIC, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from sourceware.org (ip-8-43-85-97.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7CD791E87E for ; Sun, 31 Jul 2022 04:38:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6E3F38582AD for ; Sun, 31 Jul 2022 08:38:53 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org D6E3F38582AD DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1659256733; bh=c6hyUxKe3+cRdRQcwynNS29n6yyyMw4IF5mVvBwyqD4=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc: From; b=vY5UAra9by++yumKoDrszTKcTBkPlY7GjcWhHfmgVssNV4Au+DXmdOOfvhMsHwHfB rqILNOscxMEnxtM37u2jYMn1R93k/FKBtpwVoQaDKYSJI8Z8qCfNgtazyQBwfTOpWf BZRmjvpNn38ua/1ABqGKRwG+D09XtRQkTE0SrSgw= Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [IPv6:2001:67c:2178:6::1d]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C96538582AD for ; Sun, 31 Jul 2022 08:38:34 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 9C96538582AD Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 73CFD20500; Sun, 31 Jul 2022 08:38:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 598F813754; Sun, 31 Jul 2022 08:38:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id BBehFIk/5mK1HQAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Sun, 31 Jul 2022 08:38:33 +0000 Message-ID: <07a7deb5-e33e-9c0a-ec34-02d81c0364d6@suse.de> Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2022 10:38:33 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH][gdbsupport] Use task size in parallel_for_each Content-Language: en-US To: Tom Tromey References: <20220718194219.GA16823@delia.home> <4fc23fcd-c15d-7622-8b51-cc48cd3cba16@palves.net> <75931310-5dcd-059d-9221-6c94dbcd231f@suse.de> <87leslj786.fsf@tromey.com> <87zgh0sv13.fsf@tromey.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Tom de Vries via Gdb-patches Reply-To: Tom de Vries Cc: Tom de Vries via Gdb-patches , Pedro Alves Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" On 7/23/22 08:51, Tom de Vries via Gdb-patches wrote: > On 7/22/22 23:21, Tom Tromey wrote: >> Tom> Then, rather than using parallel_for, the DWARF reader could send >> N jobs >> Tom> to the thread pool, and each job would simply take the next >> available CU >> Tom> by incrementing an atomic counter.  When the counter reached the >> number >> Tom> of CUs, a job would stop. >> >> Here's a patch.  I didn't test it much, though according to "maint >> time 1", >> it is ~10% faster on gdb itself.  I pushed it as "t/work-stealing" on my >> github as well, in case you want to try it out. >> > > I've tried it out (initially didn't build for me with gcc 7.5.0, but it > did after using gcc 12.1.1). > > So, the same libxul experiment as before, gcc-12, O2, base commit > 5ae3df226b1. > > --- > > base commit: > > real: 4.64 > real: 4.10 > real: 4.11 > real: 4.65 > real: 4.04 > real: 4.21 > real: 4.03 > real: 4.48 > real: 4.04 > real: 4.65 > > t/work-stealing: > > real: 3.65 > real: 3.58 > real: 3.58 > real: 3.58 > real: 3.58 > real: 3.57 > real: 3.58 > real: 3.59 > real: 3.59 > real: 3.59 > > size heuristics: > > real: 3.44 > real: 3.44 > real: 3.52 > real: 3.43 > real: 3.54 > real: 3.47 > real: 3.60 > real: 3.46 > real: 3.46 > real: 3.52 > > Just one data point of course. > I've rebase the patch series on the latest version for the gdb::make_function_view patch, and retested using the try-bot. If there are no further comments, I'll commit in a week or so. Thanks, - Tom