mmjjpp wrote: > I started reviewing and have some high level questions and comments, and a > number of other initial comments sprinkled throughout. Can you split this PR > into 2? The first being the Utils support, llvm-split changes, and the > associated llvm-split based tests; the second being the LTO support with some > added LTO tests? > > I know the callgraph based splitting is to avoid performance overhead from > loss of IPO, but have you evaluated this?
Thank you very much for the detailed review comments. I’ll carefully go through them and address the issues you raised. I have now split the original PR into two, following your suggestion: one for the Utils support, llvm-split changes, and the associated llvm-split tests; and another for the LTO-related support and tests. The LTO backend related changes are available here: https://github.com/mmjjpp/llvm-project/pull/17 Regarding the potential IPO impact of callgraph-based splitting, we did evaluate it in our practical workload. The observed performance variation was within 1%. In this evaluation, PGO was enabled, while WPD, CFI, and MemProf were not exercised. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/198702 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
