C2: Advantage of parse time inlining

[Vladimir Ivanov]

Vitaly,

Can you elaborate your question a bit? What do you compare parse-time 
inlining with? Mentioning of С1 & profile pollution in this context 
confuses me.

Usually, people care about 35 (= MaxInlineSize), because for methods up 
to MaxInlineSize their call frequency is ignored. So, fewer chances to 
end up with non-inlined call.

Best regards,
Vladimir Ivanov

On 5/14/15 7:09 PM, Vitaly Davidovich wrote:
> Any pointers? Sorry to bug you guys, but just want to make sure I
> understand this point as I see quite a bit of discussion on core-libs
> and elsewhere where people are worrying about the 35 bytecode size
> threshold for parse inlining.
>
> On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 3:36 PM, Vitaly Davidovich <vitalyd at gmail.com
> <mailto:vitalyd at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Hi guys,
>
>     Could someone please explain the advantage, if any, of parse time
>     inlining in C2? Given that FreqInlineSize is quite large by default,
>     most hot methods will get inlined anyway (well, ones that can be for
>     other reasons).  What is the advantage of parse time inlining?
>
>     Is it quicker time to peak performance if C1 is reached first?
>
>     Does it ensure that a method is inlined whereas it may not be if
>     it's already compiled into a medium/large method otherwise?
>
>     Is parse time inlining not susceptible to profile pollution? I
>     suspect it is since the interpreter has already profiled the inlinee
>     either way, but wanted to check.
>
>     Anything else I'm not thinking about?
>
>     Thanks
>
>