The order for writing records of the stdlib currently depends on
`StringMap` iteration (in a slightly roundabout manner). Sort these
alphabetically instead.
If a module was first read using the adjacent swiftmodule and then
reloaded using the swiftinterface, we would do an up to date check on
the adjacent module but write out the unit using the swiftinterface.
This would cause the same modules to be indexed repeatedly for the first
invocation using a new SDK. On the next run we would instead raad the
swiftmodule from the cache and thus the out of date check would match
up.
The impact of this varies depending on the size of the module graph in
the initial compilation and the number of jobs started at the same time.
Each SDK dependency is re-indexed *and* reloaded, which is a drain on
both CPU and memory. Thus, if many jobs are initially started and
they're all going down this path, it can cause the system to run out of
memory very quickly.
Resolves rdar://103119964.
For various reasons, it can be useful/interesting to create builds of
Swift that minimize dependencies. Let's try to keep that working as long
as we can.
This changes the Swift resource directory from looking like
lib/
swift/
macosx/
libswiftCore.dylib
libswiftDarwin.dylib
x86_64/
Swift.swiftmodule
Swift.swiftdoc
Darwin.swiftmodule
Darwin.swiftdoc
to
lib/
swift/
macosx/
libswiftCore.dylib
libswiftDarwin.dylib
Swift.swiftmodule/
x86_64.swiftmodule
x86_64.swiftdoc
Darwin.swiftmodule/
x86_64.swiftmodule
x86_64.swiftdoc
matching the layout we use for multi-architecture swiftmodules
everywhere else (particularly frameworks).
There's no change in this commit to how Linux swiftmodules are
packaged. There's been past interest in going the /opposite/ direction
for Linux, since there's not standard support for fat
(multi-architecture) .so libraries. Moving the .so search path /down/
to an architecture-specific directory on Linux would allow the same
resource directory to be used for both host-compiling and
cross-compiling.
rdar://problem/43545560
