njames93 added a comment. Running most of the clang tidy checks on the clang-tidy folder yields these results
=================================BeforePatch=================================== RUN1: 4045.17user 83.93system 11:28.80elapsed 599%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 534024maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+27584683minor)pagefaults 0swaps RUN2: 4078.06user 84.99system 11:35.99elapsed 598%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 506912maxresident)k 55312inputs+0outputs (663major+27661947minor)pagefaults 0swaps RUN3: 4040.77user 86.02system 11:28.85elapsed 599%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 547096maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+27698937minor)pagefaults 0swaps ==================================AfterPatch=================================== RUN1: 4025.33user 83.32system 11:27.00elapsed 598%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 530568maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+27689512minor)pagefaults 0swaps RUN2: 4056.93user 83.36system 11:32.31elapsed 598%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 529120maxresident)k 3752inputs+0outputs (19major+27794845minor)pagefaults 0swaps RUN3: 4029.05user 85.45system 11:26.31elapsed 599%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 533508maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+27730918minor)pagefaults 0swaps Shows a consistent improvement but there tests are very noisy and dont focus on just the matching, they also include all the other boilderplate when running clang-tidy over a database. not to mention a small sample size Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D80202/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D80202 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
