mirror of
https://github.com/apple/swift.git
synced 2025-12-14 20:36:38 +01:00
This change could impact Swift programs that previously appeared well-behaved, but weren't fully tested in debug mode. Now, when running in release mode, they may trap with the message "error: overlapping accesses...". Recent optimizations have brought performance where I think it needs to be for adoption. More optimizations are planned, and some benchmarks should be further improved, but at this point we're ready to begin receiving bug reports. That will help prioritize the remaining work for Swift 5. Of the 656 public microbenchmarks in the Swift repository, there are still several regressions larger than 10%: TEST OLD NEW DELTA RATIO ClassArrayGetter2 139 1307 +840.3% **0.11x** HashTest 631 1233 +95.4% **0.51x** NopDeinit 21269 32389 +52.3% **0.66x** Hanoi 1478 2166 +46.5% **0.68x** Calculator 127 158 +24.4% **0.80x** Dictionary3OfObjects 391 455 +16.4% **0.86x** CSVParsingAltIndices2 526 604 +14.8% **0.87x** Prims 549 626 +14.0% **0.88x** CSVParsingAlt2 1252 1411 +12.7% **0.89x** Dictionary4OfObjects 206 232 +12.6% **0.89x** ArrayInClass 46 51 +10.9% **0.90x** The common pattern in these benchmarks is to define an array of data as a class property and to repeatedly access that array through the class reference. Each of those class property accesses now incurs a runtime call. Naturally, introducing a runtime call in a loop that otherwise does almost no work incurs substantial overhead. This is similar to the issue caused by automatic reference counting. In some cases, more sophistacated optimization will be able to determine the same object is repeatedly accessed. Furthermore, the overhead of the runtime call itself can be improved. But regardless of how well we optimize, there will always a class of microbenchmarks in which the runtime check has a noticeable impact. As a general guideline, avoid performing class property access within the most performance critical loops, particularly on different objects in each loop iteration. If that isn't possible, it may help if the visibility of those class properties is private or internal.
48 KiB
48 KiB