Created attachment 314220[details]
Archive of layout-test-results from ews103 for mac-elcapitan
The attached test failures were seen while running run-webkit-tests on the mac-ews.
Bot: ews103 Port: mac-elcapitan Platform: Mac OS X 10.11.6
Created attachment 314224[details]
Archive of layout-test-results from ews104 for mac-elcapitan-wk2
The attached test failures were seen while running run-webkit-tests on the mac-wk2-ews.
Bot: ews104 Port: mac-elcapitan-wk2 Platform: Mac OS X 10.11.6
Created attachment 314225[details]
Archive of layout-test-results from ews124 for ios-simulator-wk2
The attached test failures were seen while running run-webkit-tests on the ios-sim-ews.
Bot: ews124 Port: ios-simulator-wk2 Platform: Mac OS X 10.12.5
Created attachment 314232[details]
Archive of layout-test-results from ews112 for mac-elcapitan
The attached test failures were seen while running run-webkit-tests on the mac-debug-ews.
Bot: ews112 Port: mac-elcapitan Platform: Mac OS X 10.11.6
Created attachment 314241[details]
Archive of layout-test-results from ews114 for mac-elcapitan
The attached test failures were seen while running run-webkit-tests on the mac-debug-ews.
Bot: ews114 Port: mac-elcapitan Platform: Mac OS X 10.11.6
Created attachment 314255[details]
Archive of layout-test-results from ews115 for mac-elcapitan
The attached test failures were seen while running run-webkit-tests on the mac-debug-ews.
Bot: ews115 Port: mac-elcapitan Platform: Mac OS X 10.11.6
Created attachment 314345[details]
Archive of layout-test-results from ews105 for mac-elcapitan-wk2
The attached test failures were seen while running run-webkit-tests on the mac-wk2-ews.
Bot: ews105 Port: mac-elcapitan-wk2 Platform: Mac OS X 10.11.6
These always could have been pointers. Originally they weren’t because we thought there was a performance benefit to not dereferencing a pointer or using a separate memory block. That seems to be what we should be discussing here. Is it OK to pay the extra overhead of a separate memory object for these two objects? Presumably the answer is yes, but I am not sure they go without saying.
(In reply to Darin Adler from comment #31)
> These always could have been pointers. Originally they weren’t because we
> thought there was a performance benefit to not dereferencing a pointer or
> using a separate memory block. That seems to be what we should be discussing
> here. Is it OK to pay the extra overhead of a separate memory object for
> these two objects? Presumably the answer is yes, but I am not sure they go
> without saying.
Frame is a rare enough object and the code that touches FrameLoader or NavigationScheduler are rare enough & not hot enough that this shouldn't matter but we should probably come up with some strategy to avoid allocating memory each time these member variables are allocated.
For example, we could come up with a mechanism to allocate memory for all these UniqueRef members at once instead of allocating for each one.
We don’t need to do anything fancy if there is no real problem. I was never concerned about the extra memory overhead of allocating a couple more malloc blocks, but I thought that adding to a pointer might be more efficient than dereferencing a pointer to find the frame loader given the frame.
If we’re sure that’s not significant then lets not worry about it.
2017-06-29 19:24 PDT, Ryosuke Niwa
2017-06-29 19:44 PDT, Ryosuke Niwa
2017-06-29 19:48 PDT, Ryosuke Niwa
2017-06-29 20:46 PDT, Build Bot
2017-06-29 21:01 PDT, Build Bot
2017-06-29 21:05 PDT, Build Bot
2017-06-29 22:02 PDT, Build Bot
2017-06-29 23:44 PDT, Build Bot
2017-06-30 02:02 PDT, Ryosuke Niwa
2017-06-30 02:04 PDT, Ryosuke Niwa
2017-06-30 04:01 PDT, Build Bot
2017-06-30 16:08 PDT, Ryosuke Niwa
2017-06-30 16:33 PDT, Ryosuke Niwa
2017-06-30 18:34 PDT, Build Bot