For most nodes (e.g., OPTRLIT, OMAKESLICE, OCONVIFACE), escape
analysis prints "escapes to heap" or "does not escape" to indicate
whether that node's allocation can be heap or stack allocated.
These messages are also emitted for OADDR, even though OADDR does not
actually allocate anything itself. Moreover, it's redundant because
escape analysis already prints "moved to heap" diagnostics when an
OADDR node like "&x" causes x to require heap allocation.
Because OADDR nodes don't allocate memory, my escape analysis rewrite
doesn't naturally emit the "escapes to heap" / "does not escape"
diagnostics for them. It's also non-trivial to replicate the exact
semantics esc.go uses for OADDR.
Since there are so many of these messages, I'm disabling them in this
CL by themselves. I modified esc.go to suppress the Warnl calls
without any other behavior changes, and then used a shell script to
automatically remove any ERROR messages mentioned by run.go in
"missing error" or "no match for" lines.
Fixes#16300.
Updates #23109.
Change-Id: I3993e2743c3ff83ccd0893f4e73b366ff8871a57
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/170319
Run-TryBot: Matthew Dempsky <mdempsky@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Cherry Zhang <cherryyz@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Chase <drchase@google.com>
A Go user made a well-documented request for a slightly
lower threshold. I tested against a selection of other
people's benchmarks, and saw a tiny benefit (possibly noise)
at equally tiny cost, and no unpleasant surprises observed
in benchmarking.
I.e., might help, doesn't hurt, low risk, request was
delivered on a silver platter.
It did, however, change the behavior of one test because
now bytes.Buffer.Grow is eligible for inlining.
Updates #19348.
Change-Id: I85e3088a4911290872b8c6bda9601b5354c48695
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/151977
Run-TryBot: David Chase <drchase@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
This is a simple tweak to allow a bit more mid-stack inlining.
In cases like this:
func f() {
g()
}
We'd really like to inline f into its callers. It can't hurt.
We implement this optimization by making calls a bit cheaper, enough
to afford a single call in the function body, but not 2.
The remaining budget allows for some argument modification, or perhaps
a wrapping conditional:
func f(x int) {
g(x, 0)
}
func f(x int) {
if x > 0 {
g()
}
}
Update #19348
Change-Id: Ifb1ea0dd1db216c3fd5c453c31c3355561fe406f
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/147361
Reviewed-by: Austin Clements <austin@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Chase <drchase@google.com>
Adds a new build tag "gcflags_noopt" that can be used in test/*.go
tests.
Fixes#27833
Change-Id: I4ea0ccd9e9e58c4639de18645fec81eb24a3a929
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/136898
Run-TryBot: Brad Fitzpatrick <bradfitz@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
Added some more cases that should be guarded against regression.
Change-Id: I9f1dda2fd0be9b6e167ef1cc018fc8cce55c066c
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/134017
Run-TryBot: Iskander Sharipov <iskander.sharipov@intel.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Ian Lance Taylor <iant@golang.org>
Rationale: small buffer optimization does not work and it has
made things slower since 2014. Until we can make it work,
we should prefer simpler code that also turns out to be more
efficient.
With this change, it's possible to use
NewBuffer(make([]byte, 0, bootstrapSize)) to get the desired
stack-allocated initial buffer since escape analysis can
prove the created slice to be non-escaping.
New implementation key points:
- Zero value bytes.Buffer performs better than before
- You can have a truly stack-allocated buffer, and it's not even limited to 64 bytes
- The unsafe.Sizeof(bytes.Buffer{}) is reduced significantly
- Empty writes don't cause allocations
Buffer benchmarks from bytes package:
name old time/op new time/op delta
ReadString-8 9.20µs ± 1% 9.22µs ± 1% ~ (p=0.148 n=10+10)
WriteByte-8 28.1µs ± 0% 26.2µs ± 0% -6.78% (p=0.000 n=10+10)
WriteRune-8 64.9µs ± 0% 65.0µs ± 0% +0.16% (p=0.000 n=10+10)
BufferNotEmptyWriteRead-8 469µs ± 0% 461µs ± 0% -1.76% (p=0.000 n=9+10)
BufferFullSmallReads-8 108µs ± 0% 108µs ± 0% -0.21% (p=0.000 n=10+10)
name old speed new speed delta
ReadString-8 3.56GB/s ± 1% 3.55GB/s ± 1% ~ (p=0.165 n=10+10)
WriteByte-8 146MB/s ± 0% 156MB/s ± 0% +7.26% (p=0.000 n=9+10)
WriteRune-8 189MB/s ± 0% 189MB/s ± 0% -0.16% (p=0.000 n=10+10)
name old alloc/op new alloc/op delta
ReadString-8 32.8kB ± 0% 32.8kB ± 0% ~ (all equal)
WriteByte-8 0.00B 0.00B ~ (all equal)
WriteRune-8 0.00B 0.00B ~ (all equal)
BufferNotEmptyWriteRead-8 4.72kB ± 0% 4.67kB ± 0% -1.02% (p=0.000 n=10+10)
BufferFullSmallReads-8 3.44kB ± 0% 3.33kB ± 0% -3.26% (p=0.000 n=10+10)
name old allocs/op new allocs/op delta
ReadString-8 1.00 ± 0% 1.00 ± 0% ~ (all equal)
WriteByte-8 0.00 0.00 ~ (all equal)
WriteRune-8 0.00 0.00 ~ (all equal)
BufferNotEmptyWriteRead-8 3.00 ± 0% 3.00 ± 0% ~ (all equal)
BufferFullSmallReads-8 3.00 ± 0% 2.00 ± 0% -33.33% (p=0.000 n=10+10)
The most notable thing in go1 benchmarks is reduced allocs in HTTPClientServer (-1 alloc):
HTTPClientServer-8 64.0 ± 0% 63.0 ± 0% -1.56% (p=0.000 n=10+10)
For more explanations and benchmarks see the referenced issue.
Updates #7921
Change-Id: Ica0bf85e1b70fb4f5dc4f6a61045e2cf4ef72aa3
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/133715
Reviewed-by: Martin Möhrmann <moehrmann@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Robert Griesemer <gri@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Brad Fitzpatrick <bradfitz@golang.org>
