On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Ben Kelly <bke...@mozilla.com> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Tristan Bourvon <tbour...@mozilla.com> > wrote: > >> Here's the RFC of the overflow builtins: >> http://clang-developers.42468.n3.nabble.com/RFC-Introduce- >> overflow-builtins-td3838320.html >> Along with the tracking issue: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12290 >> And the patch: >> https://github.com/llvm-mirror/clang/commit/98d1ec1e99625176626b0bcd44cef7 >> df6e89b289 >> >> There's also another patch that was added on top of this one which adds >> more overflow builtins: >> https://github.com/llvm-mirror/clang/commit/c41c63fbf84cc904580e733d1123d3 >> b03bb5584c >> >> It seems clear that this optimization could bring big performance >> improvements on hot functions. It could also reduce binary size >> substantially (we're talking about 14->5 instructions in their case). >> > > Do we have a bug filed to investigate these overflow builtins? Should we > file one?
There is bug 1356936 for mozilla::CheckedInt; I don't know how many saturating-style arithmetic implementations we have in the tree, or whether similar bugs exist for those. -Nathan _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
