<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugs.webkit.org/" />
</head>
<body>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - LLInt should support other types of prototype GetById caching."
href="https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158083#c40">Comment # 40</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - LLInt should support other types of prototype GetById caching."
href="https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158083">bug 158083</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:keith_miller@apple.com" title="Keith Miller <keith_miller@apple.com>"> <span class="fn">Keith Miller</span></a>
</span></b>
<pre>(In reply to <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=158083#c39">comment #39</a>)
<span class="quote">> (In reply to <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=158083#c38">comment #38</a>)
> > Comment on <span class=""><a href="attachment.cgi?id=280560&action=diff" name="attach_280560" title="Patch">attachment 280560</a> <a href="attachment.cgi?id=280560&action=edit" title="Patch">[details]</a></span>
> > Patch
> >
> > View in context:
> > <a href="https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=280560&action=review">https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=280560&action=review</a>
> >
> > Looks good. I think it's almost ready to go. Saam and I have a few comments
> > before the patch is ready to land however.
> >
> > > Source/JavaScriptCore/llint/LLIntSlowPaths.cpp:659
> > > + if ((slot.isValue() || slot.isAccessor()) && slot.slotBase() == baseValue) {
> >
> > Why clear the cache if we have a self accessor? There is no cost to leaving
> > the old value cache in place.
>
> I see your point. Actually, the main reason I implemented it was because I
> though it was the case where handling a cache miss and clearing the old
> cache. However, if I am not wrong, It is the case just to self accessors,
> right?
>
> In our implementation, we just cache the prototype once (when
> pc[7].u.operand reaches 0) and after that, all cache misses are handled by
> the _llint_get_by_id_proto_acessor opcode slowPath case. The advantage to
> clear the cache is to avoid all these misses, however, the original
> _llint_get_by_id_proto_acessor also check for misses and there is no real
> improvement clearing the cache, right?
> </span >
That's right. Unless we have something else to put in the cache or the cache becomes invalid there is no benefit to clearing it.
<span class="quote">> I am going to change it.
>
> BTW, I have already an first implementation of CustomAcessors. What I need
> to finish is inline the CustomAcessor call to Assembly code. I think it is a
> good idea send them in the same patch, since the files touched are the same.
> As you pointed me instructions to try inline the Getter, I already have an
> idea what I need to do to complete this implementation.</span >
Cool, sounds like a plan. Let me know if you have any other questions.</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>