Delete code related to CompilationRelaxations.NoStringInterning #64521
Conversation
The code that was dealing with this relaxation was deleted in dotnet#57693 last year (ceeload.cpp, line 4006). We still had code that was telling RyuJIT not to inline string literals across modules if `NoStringInterning` is active because it might be observable, but since fragile NGen got deleted, I don't believe it's actually observable anymore and we could have deleted this together with fragile NGen support. Closes dotnet#53726 - we no longer need to worry about loosening the restriction - we just drop it all.
|
I couldn't figure out the best area label to add to this PR. If you have write-permissions please help me learn by adding exactly one area label. |
jkotas
added
the
area-CodeGen-coreclr
|
Tagging subscribers to this area: @JulieLeeMSFT Issue DetailsThe code that was dealing with this relaxation was deleted in #57693 last year (ceeload.cpp, line 4006). We still had code that was telling RyuJIT not to inline string literals across modules if Closes #53726 - we no longer need to worry about loosening the restriction - we just drop it all.
|
|
Wow, I somehow missed this one, does it mean we can now inline methods with string literals from different assemblies? 🎉 🎉 |
Barely, in fact entirely, unrelated, it would be nice if we didn't have so many resource strings duplicated across the shared framework assemblies. Some strings are duplicated 20 times. |
I hope so! |
|
Most likely all improvements in this one dotnet/perf-autofiling-issues#3263 are related |
I double checked, it does work :) |
|
Arm64 improvements: dotnet/perf-autofiling-issues#3289 |
|
Arm64 improvements dotnet/perf-autofiling-issues#3436 |
ghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
5 participants
The code that was dealing with this relaxation was deleted in #57693 last year (ceeload.cpp, line 4006). We still had code that was telling RyuJIT not to inline string literals across modules if
NoStringInterningis active because it might be observable, but since fragile NGen got deleted, I don't believe it's actually observable anymore and we could have deleted this together with fragile NGen support.Closes #53726 - we no longer need to worry about loosening the restriction - we just drop it all.