ping
> On 2015-Dec-17, at 13:56, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith <dexonsm...@apple.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>> On 2015-Dec-16, at 14:42, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith <dexonsm...@apple.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> This is a follow-up to r239666: "Fix PR12999 - unordered_set::insert
>> calls operator new when no insert occurs". That fix didn't apply to
>> `unordered_map` because unordered_map::value_type gets packed inside:
>> --
>> union __value_type {
>> pair<key_type, mapped_type> __nc; // Only C++11 or higher.
>> pair<const key_type, mapped_type> __cc; // Always.
>> // Constructors...
>> };
>> --
>> and the underlying __hash_table only knows about __value_type.
>
> Sorry for the quick ping, but I realized this morning that my approach
> was still leaving mallocs on the table.
>
> I've attached a new patch that handles more cases.
>
> This patch should avoid unnecessary mallocs whenever the caller passes
> in a pair<T, U> such that T is trivially convertible to key_type.
>
> Since __hash_table's value_type is really *never* a pair (for
> unordered_map, it's a union of two pairs) the static dispatch is all in
> unordered_map. It's doing this:
> - If the argument isn't a pair<>, alloc.
> - If argument.first can be referenced as const key_type&, don't alloc.
> - If argument.first can be trivially converted to key_type, don't
> alloc.
> - Else alloc.
>
> In the pre-C++11 world the caller has already converted to
> unordered_map::value_type. We can always avoid the alloc.
>
> To support all of this:
> - In C++03, __unordered_map_equal and __unordered_map_hasher need to
> handle unordered_map::value_type.
> - In C++03, __hash_table::__insert_unique_value() now takes its
> argument by template.
> - In C++11, __hash_table::__insert_unique_value() is now a one-liner
> that forwards to __insert_unique_key_value() for the real work.
> - The versions of __hash_table::__construct_node() that take a
> pre-computed hash have been renamed to __construct_node_hash(), and
> these versions use perfect forwarding.
>
> Most of the following still apply:
>
>> This is one of my first patches for libc++, and I'm not sure of a few
>> things:
>> - Did I successfully match the coding style? (I'm kind of lost
>> without clang-format TBH.)
>> - Should I separate the change to __construct_node_hash() into a
>> separate prep commit? (I would if this were LLVM, but I'm not sure
>> if the common practice is different for libc++.)
>> - Most of the overloads I added to __unordered_map_hasher and
>> __unordered_map_equal aren't actually used by
>> __hash_table::__insert_unique_value(). Should I omit the unused
>> ones? (Again, for LLVM I would have omitted them.)
>
> (For the updated patch, I went with the LLVM approach of only adding
> the used API. It seems more appropriate in this case.)
>
>> After this I'll fix the same performance issue in std::map (and I
>> assume std::set?).
0001-unordered_map-Avoid-unnecessary-mallocs-when-no-i-v2.patch
Description: Binary data
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
