Improve performance of array_find() etc #18157

nielsdos · 2025-03-26T22:14:42Z

This avoids destruction logic for the common case, avoids some copy, and adds an optimization hint.

On an intel i7 1185G7:

Benchmark 1: ./sapi/cli/php x.php
  Time (mean ± σ): 543.7 ms ± 3.8 ms [User: 538.9 ms, System: 4.4 ms]
  Range (min … max): 538.4 ms … 552.9 ms 10 runs

Benchmark 2: ./sapi/cli/php_old x.php
  Time (mean ± σ): 583.0 ms ± 4.2 ms [User: 578.4 ms, System: 3.4 ms]
  Range (min … max): 579.3 ms … 593.9 ms 10 runs

Summary
  ./sapi/cli/php x.php ran
    1.07 ± 0.01 times faster than ./sapi/cli/php_old x.php

On an intel i7 4790:

Benchmark 1: ./sapi/cli/php x.php
  Time (mean ± σ):     828.6 ms ±   4.8 ms    [User: 824.4 ms, System: 1.6 ms]
  Range (min … max):   822.8 ms … 839.0 ms    10 runs

Benchmark 2: ./sapi/cli/php_old x.php
  Time (mean ± σ):     940.1 ms ±  26.4 ms    [User: 934.4 ms, System: 2.5 ms]
  Range (min … max):   918.0 ms … 981.1 ms    10 runs

Summary
  ./sapi/cli/php x.php ran
    1.13 ± 0.03 times faster than ./sapi/cli/php_old x.php

This avoids destruction logic for the common case, avoids some copy, and adds an optimization hint. On an intel i7 1185G7: ``` Benchmark 1: ./sapi/cli/php x.php Time (mean ± σ): 543.7 ms ± 3.8 ms [User: 538.9 ms, System: 4.4 ms] Range (min … max): 538.4 ms … 552.9 ms 10 runs Benchmark 2: ./sapi/cli/php_old x.php Time (mean ± σ): 583.0 ms ± 4.2 ms [User: 578.4 ms, System: 3.4 ms] Range (min … max): 579.3 ms … 593.9 ms 10 runs Summary ./sapi/cli/php x.php ran 1.07 ± 0.01 times faster than ./sapi/cli/php_old x.php ``` On an intel i7 4790: ``` Benchmark 1: ./sapi/cli/php x.php Time (mean ± σ): 828.6 ms ± 4.8 ms [User: 824.4 ms, System: 1.6 ms] Range (min … max): 822.8 ms … 839.0 ms 10 runs Benchmark 2: ./sapi/cli/php_old x.php Time (mean ± σ): 940.1 ms ± 26.4 ms [User: 934.4 ms, System: 2.5 ms] Range (min … max): 918.0 ms … 981.1 ms 10 runs Summary ./sapi/cli/php x.php ran 1.13 ± 0.03 times faster than ./sapi/cli/php_old x.php ```

TimWolla

LGTM, except for the two remarks.

$ grep -m1 'model name' /proc/cpuinfo
model name	: 13th Gen Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-1365U
$ cat test.php
<?php
$array = range(1, 10000);

$result = 0;
for ($i = 0; $i < 5000; $i++) {
    $result += array_find($array, static function ($item) {
            return $item === 5000;
    });
}
var_dump($result);
$ taskset -c 0 hyperfine -L php php-before,php-after '/tmp/bench/{php} test.php'
Benchmark 1: /tmp/bench/php-before test.php
  Time (mean ± σ):     597.8 ms ±   4.6 ms    [User: 594.0 ms, System: 2.8 ms]
  Range (min … max):   592.4 ms … 606.0 ms    10 runs
 
Benchmark 2: /tmp/bench/php-after test.php
  Time (mean ± σ):     568.2 ms ±   9.5 ms    [User: 564.4 ms, System: 2.7 ms]
  Range (min … max):   560.9 ms … 591.3 ms    10 runs
 
Summary
  /tmp/bench/php-after test.php ran
    1.05 ± 0.02 times faster than /tmp/bench/php-before test.php

TimWolla · 2025-03-27T08:32:53Z

ext/standard/array.c

+		bool retval_true;
+		switch (Z_TYPE(retval)) {
+			case IS_TRUE:
+				retval_true = !negate_condition;
+				break;
+			case IS_FALSE:
+				retval_true = negate_condition;
+				break;
+			default:
+				retval_true = zend_is_true(&retval) ^ negate_condition;
+				zval_ptr_dtor(&retval);
+				break;
+		}


This can probably also apply to array_filter(). Perhaps this logic can be moved into some force-inlined:

bool is_true(zval *retval, bool negate_condition) { switch (Z_TYPE(retval)) { case IS_TRUE: return !negate_condition; case IS_FALSE: return negate_condition; default: bool retval_true = zend_is_true(&retval) ^ negate_condition; zval_ptr_dtor(&retval); return retval_true; } }

that is then used for array_find and array_filter.

TimWolla · 2025-03-27T08:36:33Z

ext/standard/array.c

@@ -6620,23 +6620,32 @@ static enum php_array_find_result php_array_find(const HashTable *array, zend_fc
 		if (!str_key) {
 			ZVAL_LONG(&args[1], num_key);
 		} else {
+			ZEND_ASSUME(!HT_IS_PACKED(array));


This could benefit from a short explanatory comment.

Ack. It's also not clear to me how this improves performance.

iluuu1994

LGTM in general. I'm also wondering whether Z_PARAM_FUNC() may benefit from optimizations for \Closure. zend_is_callable_ex() also finds the first user call frame, even though it's never used in zend_get_callable_name_ex() in the IS_OBJECT path. But this is ofc something that can be considered separately.

I was also wondering if it may be possible to store zend_fcall_info_cache statically for each function, and allow it to be re-used between calls through a polymorphic cache. This should work for immutable values living in shm, at least, given that they are guaranteed not to relocate. However, most callables are likely passed as \Closures nowadays, so this may not matter much anymore.

iluuu1994 · 2025-03-27T16:38:56Z

ext/standard/array.c

@@ -6620,23 +6620,32 @@ static enum php_array_find_result php_array_find(const HashTable *array, zend_fc
 		if (!str_key) {
 			ZVAL_LONG(&args[1], num_key);
 		} else {
+			ZEND_ASSUME(!HT_IS_PACKED(array));


Ack. It's also not clear to me how this improves performance.

TimWolla · 2025-03-27T18:26:01Z

I'm also wondering whether Z_PARAM_FUNC() may benefit from optimizations for \Closure.

It probably does. See PR description in: symfony/symfony#60000.

I planned to have a look at the performance differences between Closure and callable as parameter types already.

TimWolla · 2025-03-28T08:20:57Z

For reference, performance numbers after the latest changes with the extra function:

Benchmark 1: /tmp/bench/php-before test.php
  Time (mean ± σ):     667.0 ms ±   3.7 ms    [User: 662.7 ms, System: 2.8 ms]
  Range (min … max):   663.1 ms … 674.3 ms    10 runs
 
Benchmark 2: /tmp/bench/php-after test.php
  Time (mean ± σ):     650.5 ms ±   3.3 ms    [User: 646.9 ms, System: 2.0 ms]
  Range (min … max):   647.1 ms … 657.7 ms    10 runs
 
Summary
  /tmp/bench/php-after test.php ran
    1.03 ± 0.01 times faster than /tmp/bench/php-before test.php

No idea why there even is a 70ms difference in the new baseline …

nielsdos · 2025-03-28T08:26:25Z

@TimWolla And if you add zend_always_inline to php_is_true ?

TimWolla · 2025-03-29T18:32:33Z

@nielsdos Doesn't make a difference. And also note how the php-before has gotten slower (with the commit being 370f242 for the newer test). So it's probably my CPU being cursed again.

…re` to a `callable` parameter With `Closure`s existing since 5.3 and first class callables since 8.1, nowadays the most common type of callable likely is a `Closure`. Type checking a `Closure` argument for a `callable` parameter however does quite a bit of work, when a simple CE check would suffice. We thus do this. For: <?php function closure_(\Closure $f) { $f('abc'); } function callable_(callable $f) { $f('abc'); } $c = strrev(...); for ($i = 0; $i < 10000000; $i++) { closure_($c); } with the call in the loop appropriately replaced and running on a Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-1365U, I get the following timings: Benchmark 1: /tmp/bench/before callable.php Time (mean ± σ): 368.9 ms ± 5.2 ms [User: 365.0 ms, System: 3.6 ms] Range (min … max): 359.8 ms … 374.5 ms 10 runs Benchmark 2: /tmp/bench/before closure.php Time (mean ± σ): 283.3 ms ± 6.0 ms [User: 279.6 ms, System: 3.4 ms] Range (min … max): 274.1 ms … 293.2 ms 10 runs Benchmark 3: /tmp/bench/after callable.php Time (mean ± σ): 279.9 ms ± 10.1 ms [User: 276.3 ms, System: 3.4 ms] Range (min … max): 269.6 ms … 301.5 ms 10 runs Benchmark 4: /tmp/bench/after closure.php Time (mean ± σ): 283.4 ms ± 2.3 ms [User: 279.5 ms, System: 3.6 ms] Range (min … max): 279.7 ms … 286.6 ms 10 runs Summary /tmp/bench/after callable.php ran 1.01 ± 0.04 times faster than /tmp/bench/before closure.php 1.01 ± 0.04 times faster than /tmp/bench/after closure.php 1.32 ± 0.05 times faster than /tmp/bench/before callable.php The “standard” `array_find()` micro-benchmark of: <?php $array = range(1, 10000); $result = 0; for ($i = 0; $i < 5000; $i++) { $result += array_find($array, static function ($item) { return $item === 5000; }); } var_dump($result); Results in: $ hyperfine -L version before,after '/tmp/bench/{version} native.php' Benchmark 1: /tmp/bench/before native.php Time (mean ± σ): 637.3 ms ± 6.4 ms [User: 632.4 ms, System: 3.9 ms] Range (min … max): 626.8 ms … 644.9 ms 10 runs Benchmark 2: /tmp/bench/after native.php Time (mean ± σ): 572.0 ms ± 3.8 ms [User: 567.8 ms, System: 3.8 ms] Range (min … max): 567.0 ms … 580.1 ms 10 runs Summary /tmp/bench/after native.php ran 1.11 ± 0.01 times faster than /tmp/bench/before native.php see php#18157 (comment)

github-actions bot added the Extension: standard label Mar 26, 2025

nielsdos marked this pull request as ready for review March 26, 2025 22:51

nielsdos requested a review from bukka as a code owner March 26, 2025 22:51

nielsdos requested review from TimWolla and iluuu1994 and removed request for bukka March 26, 2025 22:51

TimWolla approved these changes Mar 27, 2025

View reviewed changes

iluuu1994 approved these changes Mar 27, 2025

View reviewed changes

review

2fb5ea9

nielsdos merged commit 0943b8b into php:master Mar 27, 2025
9 checks passed

TimWolla mentioned this pull request Apr 8, 2025

zend_execute: Streamline typechecks in zend_check_type_slow() if an object is given #18277

Open

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Improve performance of array_find() etc #18157

Improve performance of array_find() etc #18157

nielsdos commented Mar 26, 2025

TimWolla left a comment

TimWolla Mar 27, 2025

TimWolla Mar 27, 2025

iluuu1994 Mar 27, 2025

iluuu1994 left a comment

iluuu1994 Mar 27, 2025

TimWolla commented Mar 27, 2025

TimWolla commented Mar 28, 2025

nielsdos commented Mar 28, 2025

TimWolla commented Mar 29, 2025

Improve performance of array_find() etc #18157

Improve performance of array_find() etc #18157

Conversation

nielsdos commented Mar 26, 2025

TimWolla left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

TimWolla Mar 27, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

TimWolla Mar 27, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

iluuu1994 Mar 27, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

iluuu1994 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

iluuu1994 Mar 27, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

TimWolla commented Mar 27, 2025

TimWolla commented Mar 28, 2025

nielsdos commented Mar 28, 2025

TimWolla commented Mar 29, 2025