I think you should figure out which of the configure options
--enable-single-host --enable-c-opt --enable-gcc-opts
are the most useful/beneficial for the kind of code generated by Gerbil. I suspect that --enable-single-host is the most performance-enhancing option, and --enable-c-opt only gives a marginal speed increase at the cost of a much higher C compile time.
If you do try the various combinations, please report your results here. I’d like to know if my intuition is correct.
Marc
On Mar 19, 2018, at 2:56 PM, Dimitris Vyzovitis vyzo@hackzen.org wrote:
My gambit is configured with --enable-single-host --enable-c-opt --enable-gcc-opts. I have 8G on my current laptop, but I run without a swap; the death occurs at around 6G. It's not only the memory usage though, it takes forever too. clang on travis didn't OOM, but it took 15min on the file.
I think it might be a case of really bad interaction between the various optimizers in the 3 compilers involved. The gerbil emitted code is already heavily optimized to perform match tree linearization (I have a shiny new optimizer that optimizes match and syntax- case expansions). That means you can't reasonably inline anything other than single use procedures within the optimized blocks.
-- vyzo
On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 8:41 PM, Marc Feeley feeley@iro.umontreal.ca wrote: The default inlining-limit is 350, so the expansion from 100 is quite possible.
But the problem here is that gcc chokes on the compilation of the C file. So… what are the compilation options passed to gcc?
- are you using --enable-single-host ?
- are you using a higher level of optimization such as -O2 or -O3 rather than the default -O1 ?
These will definitely increase the pressure on the C compiler. Also, some versions of gcc do a better job at compiling large C files. The file lib/_io.c in the Gambit distribution is about 90kloc and I have never gotten an OOM error from gcc while compiling it, even though I use a “make -j 8” (8 C compilations in parallel). I do have 16 GB of RAM on my machine… how much RAM do you have on yours?
Marc
On Mar 19, 2018, at 2:31 PM, Dimitris Vyzovitis vyzo@hackzen.org wrote:
It's 140kloc without the inlining declaration and just 22Kloc with the declaration.
-- vyzo
On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 8:27 PM, Marc Feeley feeley@iro.umontreal.ca wrote: Out of curiosity, what is the number of LOC of C with and without the inlining-limit?
I’m just wondering if this should be classified as an issue, or if the inliner is just doing its work as expected.
Marc
On Mar 19, 2018, at 2:23 PM, Dimitris Vyzovitis vyzo@hackzen.org wrote:
It seems it's the inliner going haywire -- if I add a (declare (inlining-limit 100)), then it compiles in 20s.
-- vyzo
On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 7:29 PM, Dimitris Vyzovitis vyzo@hackzen.org wrote: The attached file results in a 140kloc monster that results in gcc dying with OOM after several minutes of effort, and I would like to understand why. Any ideas?
-- vyzo