Issue 10539131: Fix performance regression caused by r11202.

Keyboard Shortcuts

	File
u :	up to issue
j / k :	jump to file after / before current file
J / K :	jump to next file with a comment after / before current file
	Side-by-side diff
i :	toggle intra-line diffs
e :	expand all comments
c :	collapse all comments
s :	toggle showing all comments
n / p :	next / previous diff chunk or comment
N / P :	next / previous comment
<Up> / <Down> :	next / previous line

	Issue
u :	up to list of issues
j / k :	jump to patch after / before current patch
o / <Enter> :	open current patch in side-by-side view
i :	open current patch in unified diff view

	Issue List
j / k :	jump to issue after / before current issue
o / <Enter> :	open current issue

Issue 10539131: Fix performance regression caused by r11202. (Closed)

Created:
8 years, 6 months ago by Michael Starzinger

Modified:
8 years, 6 months ago

Reviewers:
Erik Corry

CC:
v8-dev

Base URL:
https://v8.googlecode.com/svn/branches/bleeding_edge

Visibility:
Public.

More Reviews

Description

Fix performance regression caused by r11202. R=erik.corry@gmail.com BUG=v8:2156, v8:2034 TEST=mjsunit/regress/regress-2156,mjsunit/regress/regress-2034 Committed: https://code.google.com/p/v8/source/detail?r=11800

Patch Set 1 #

Patch Set 2 : Fixed missing comment. #

Patch Set 3 : Added regression test. #

Created: 8 years, 6 months ago

Download [raw] [tar.bz2]

	Unified diffs	Side-by-side diffs	Delta from patch set	Stats (+41 lines, -23 lines)			Patch
M	src/objects.h	View	1	3 chunks	+11 lines, -2 lines	0 comments	Download
M	src/objects.cc	View		6 chunks	+20 lines, -11 lines	0 comments	Download
A +	test/mjsunit/regress/regress-2156.js	View	1 2	1 chunk	+10 lines, -10 lines	0 comments	Download

Messages

Total messages: 5 (0 generated)

Expand Messages | Collapse Messages

holisme

On 2012/06/13 11:41:34, Erik Corry wrote: > Looks even better to me now It does ...

8 years, 6 months ago (2012-06-14 08:17:07 UTC) #4

Michael Starzinger

8 years, 6 months ago (2012-06-14 15:28:10 UTC) #5

On 2012/06/14 08:17:07, holisme wrote:
> On 2012/06/13 11:41:34, Erik Corry wrote:
> > Looks even better to me now
> 
> It does benefit to 3.10 branch too : could you backport it ?

Unfortunately the patch won't apply cleanly to the 3.10 branch because the
signature of some affected methods has been changed in between. Usually we don't
backport patches that don't apply cleanly unless we have a very strong reason
(e.g. security issues) to do so.

Expand Messages | Collapse Messages