Skip to content

GH-96793: Specialize FOR_ITER for generators. - #98772

Merged
markshannon merged 7 commits into
python:mainfrom
faster-cpython:specialize-for-iter-gen
Nov 7, 2022
Merged

GH-96793: Specialize FOR_ITER for generators.#98772
markshannon merged 7 commits into
python:mainfrom
faster-cpython:specialize-for-iter-gen

Conversation

@markshannon

@markshannonmarkshannon commented Oct 27, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Performance results seem to be just noise. I suspect there aren't enough uses of generators in the benchmark suite for this to make a difference.

@markshannon

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

There is a bug in this. It doesn't set the gi_exc_state stack.

@markshannon

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

https://github.com/python/cpython/compare/main...faster-cpython:cpython:specialize-for-iter-gen-handle-exc-stack?expand=1
fixes the gi_exc_state issue, but is messy. I think this would benefit from merging #96319 first

frame->frame_obj = NULL;
frame->prev_instr = _PyCode_CODE(code) - 1;
frame->is_entry = false;
frame->yield_offset = 0;

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why is this called "yield_offset", is it not the relative offset to jump by when the generator is exhausted? (the same as the arg to FOR_ITER?)

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@kumaraditya303

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

I suspect there aren't enough uses of generators in the benchmark suite for this to make a difference.

You can run https://github.com/python/pyperformance/blob/main/pyperformance/data-files/benchmarks/bm_generators/run_benchmark.py, it is specifically designed to benchmark generators (microbenchmark).

@markshannon

markshannon commented Nov 1, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

I'll run that benchmark if pyperformance ever does another release.

@markshannon

markshannon commented Nov 7, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

I'm seeing a 35% speedup on this benchmark:

Tree iterator
importtimeitclassTree:
def__init__(self, left, value, right):
self.left=leftself.value=valueself.right=rightdef__iter__(self):
ifself.left:
foriteminself.left:
yielditemyieldself.valueifself.right:
foriteminself.right:
yielditemdeftree(input: range) ->Tree|None:
n=len(input)
ifn==0:
returnNonei=n//2returnTree(tree(input[:i]), input[i], tree(input[i+1:]))
defsetup():
globaliterableassertlist(tree(range(10))) ==list(range(10))
iterable=tree(range(100000))
print(timeit.timeit("for _ in iterable: pass", "setup()", globals=globals(), number=10))

Note that this uses yield not yield from. yield from compiles to the SEND instruction which is for another PR.


And a 36% speedup on this one:

Flat iterator
importtimeitclassRangeWrapper:
def__init__(self, n):
self.r=range(n)
def__iter__(self):
foriteminself.r:
yielditemdefsetup():
globaliterableiterable=RangeWrapper(1000000)
print(timeit.timeit("for _ in iterable: pass", "setup()", globals=globals(), number=10))

Comparing the fastest of 6 runs for main and this PR.

Comment threadLib/test/test_generators.py Outdated
Comment threadLib/test/test_generators.py Outdated
Co-authored-by: Irit Katriel <1055913+iritkatriel@users.noreply.github.com>
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@markshannon@kumaraditya303@iritkatriel@bedevere-bot