On 11/17/2017 11:57 AM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> On 11/17/2017 01:37 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>
>> ISTM the better way to drive this is to query the branch probabilities.
>> It'd probably be simpler too. Is there some reason that's not a good
>> solution?
>
> (a) I'd have to learn how to do that
Yea,
On 11/17/2017 01:37 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
ISTM the better way to drive this is to query the branch probabilities.
It'd probably be simpler too. Is there some reason that's not a good
solution?
(a) I'd have to learn how to do that
(b) in the case where the condition is just a null check,
ma.cc
On 11/17/2017 09:07 AM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> We currently optimize a malloc/memset pair into a calloc call (when the
> values match, of course). This turns out to be a pessimization for
> mysql 5.6, where the allocator looks like:
>
> void *ptr = malloc (size);
> if (ptr && other_condition)
>
We currently optimize a malloc/memset pair into a calloc call (when the
values match, of course). This turns out to be a pessimization for
mysql 5.6, where the allocator looks like:
void *ptr = malloc (size);
if (ptr && other_condition)
memset (ptr, 0, size);
other_condition is false suffic
