Document and adjust node struct size for better padding usage #207
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
Member
|
Yeah I benchmarked this on my Ryzen 7 7840U laptop with Iris mandlebrot (iris_test_harness) and couldn't get a measureable performance change |
Contributor
Author
|
Hmm I would have expected at least a minimal one, but I guess MCHPRS is not memory bottlenecked at all in its current state. I suspect a real measureable difference will only appear when the actively used subsection of In that case feel free to merge or close this issue, I have no preference either way. |
Member
|
I had the same conjecture, so I am also surprised. I want to do a bit more testing with this so I'll leave it open for now |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Extracted the commit from #206.
This PR documents the layout of the
Nodestruct in the redpiler's direct backend.Other than the explaination itself, I also applied it and found out we can just reduce the inline capacity by 1 and reduce the size of the struct by 16 bytes. The alternative would be to increase the inline capacity to 13 for free.
I went for the first option as it was closer, but I have not benchmarked anything so the second idea might be better. Although I expect the difference to be miniscule.