Remove union penalties for inlining cost #50429
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
aviatesk
approved these changes
Jul 6, 2023
|
@nanosoldier |
|
Your benchmark job has completed - possible performance regressions were detected. A full report can be found here. |
|
nanosoldier seems pretty ambivalent. There are only 2 that are over 20% regressions: ["misc", "23042", "ComplexF32"] | 1.51 (5%) | 1.00 (1%) |
|
It sounds fine to me to remove, but you need to fix the offsetarray test that it breaks |
Keno
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 6, 2023
The change in #50429 moves around some dispatch boundaries and pushes the allocations in the offsetarrays `maximum!` test over the limit. The implementation of that code is massively type unstable. Somewhat, ironically, the whole original point of that test was to test that the implementation was not type-unstable (#28941), so actually opt our OffsetArrays implementation into the interface that's supposed to guarantee that. If this PR is fine here, I'll submit the same upstream to avoid diverging the implementations too much.
|
I looked at the test, but it turns out to just be actually failing what it was supposed to test and we just happened to bump the threshold. This PR changes the specialization boundaries, so it moves around some allocations, which could potentially be improved in codegen, but it's not clear to me that the generated code is actually worse, so I've split the fix to the test into #50447, bumped the threshold here and we can do any codegen improvements separately. |
I added this code back in #27057, when I first made Union-full signatures inlineable. The justification was to try to encourage the union splitting to happen on the outside. However (and I believe this changed since this code was introduced), these days inference is in complete control of union splitting and we do not take inlineability or non-inlineability of the non-unionsplit function into account when deciding how to inline. As a result, the only effect of the union split penalties was to prevent inlining of functions that are not union-split eligible (e.g. `+(::Vararg{Union{Int, Missing}, 3})`), but are nevertheless cheap by our inlining metric. There is really no reason not to try to inline such functions, so delete this logic.
aviatesk
added a commit
to JuliaDebug/Cthulhu.jl
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 15, 2023
aviatesk
added a commit
to JuliaDebug/Cthulhu.jl
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 15, 2023
DilumAluthge
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 1, 2023
The change in #50429 moves around some dispatch boundaries and pushes the allocations in the offsetarrays `maximum!` test over the limit. The implementation of that code is massively type unstable. Somewhat, ironically, the whole original point of that test was to test that the implementation was not type-unstable (#28941), so actually opt our OffsetArrays implementation into the interface that's supposed to guarantee that. If this PR is fine here, I'll submit the same upstream to avoid diverging the implementations too much. Co-authored-by: Jameson Nash <vtjnash@gmail.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I added this code back in #27057, when I first made Union-full signatures inlineable. The justification was to try to encourage the union splitting to happen on the outside. However (and I believe this changed since this code was introduced), these days inference is in complete control of union splitting and we do not take inlineability or non-inlineability of the non-unionsplit function into account when deciding how to inline. As a result, the only effect of the union split penalties was to prevent inlining of functions that are not union-split eligible (e.g.
+(::Vararg{Union{Int, Missing}, 3})), but are nevertheless cheap by our inlining metric. There is really no reason not to try to inline such functions, so delete this logic.