|
unfortunately something about the wrapper functions adjusts codegen even when
the wrapper functions themselves are just calls to inner functions. the in-tree
benchmark (known to not be comprehensive, but enough to spot a difference),
showed a ~3.5% regression in throughput with the prior commit, even though it
doesn't change behavior at all.
explicit #[inline(always)] gets things to a state where the wrapper functions
do not penalize performance. for an example of the differences in codegen, see
below.
before:
```
< 141d4: 48 39 fa cmp %rdi,%rdx
< 141d7: 0f 84 0b 4d 00 00 je 18ee8 <_ZN5bench16do_decode_swathe17h694154735739ce4cE+0x4e58>
< 141dd: 0f b6 0f movzbl (%rdi),%ecx
< 141e0: 48 83 c7 01 add $0x1,%rdi
< 141e4: 48 89 7c 24 38 mov %rdi,0x38(%rsp)
... snip ...
```
after:
```
> 141d4: 48 39 ea cmp %rbp,%rdx
> 141d7: 0f 84 97 4c 00 00 je 18e74 <_ZN5bench16do_decode_swathe17h694154735739ce4cE+0x4de4>
> 141dd: 0f b6 4d 00 movzbl 0x0(%rbp),%ecx
> 141e1: 48 83 c5 01 add $0x1,%rbp
> 141e5: 48 89 6c 24 38 mov %rbp,0x38(%rsp)
... snip ...
```
there are several spans of code with this kind of change involved; there are no
explicit calls to `get_kinda_unchecked` or `unreachable_kinda_unchecked` but
clearly a difference did make it through to the benchmark's code.
while the choice of `rbp` instead of `rdi` wouldn't seem very interesting, the
instructions themselves are more substantially different. `0fb60f` vs
`0fb64d00`; to encode `[rbp + 0]`, the instruction requires a displacement,
and is one byte longer as a result. there are several instructions
so-impacted, and i suspect the increased code size is what ended up changing
benchmark behavior.
after adding these `#[inline(always)]` annotations, there is no difference in
generated code with or without the `kinda_unchecked` helpers!
|
