Commit Graph
2 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
Fr0zkaandClaude Opus 5 ab4bbe3680 perf(generation): field-exact LOD0 overhead removal; the unknown bucket is Core.dll
Field-preserving floor round (Codex; reviewed by me against the code):
- exact per-(sample, passage) caching of native/generic floor projections and walkable-air
  checks, behind voxel.FloorRound1PassageProjectionCache
- a zero-work disabled path for VoxelDensityProfile::FScopedTimer, unchanged when enabled
- pointer / range-for iteration in the proven-hot tunnel, passage, spatial and candidate loops
  (TArray RangeCheck was ~6.5% of LOD0 samples on the Development binaries the owner plays on)
- FVector2D temporaries replaced with scalar doubles, same operations in the same order
- FSurfaceColumn made trivial, so thread-local construction does no work. Verified safe:
  ComputeSurfaceColumn writes all five outputs unconditionally before any branch, and every read
  of Box.Cols is gated by Box.Computed

Verified: export OBJ byte-identical (b3e5f4c3..9b377); capability 20,830 / 10,909; all 8
interleaved game runs gave identical totals (841 tiles / 669,834 triangles static, 2,348 /
1,985,216 moving, the same as previous rounds). Per-tile identity for the always-on changes still
needs a check against a stored trace; that is queued first in the next round.

Game path (sampler off, two interleaved runs each):
  projection-cache switch alone: neutral (static worker +0.41%, moving -0.05%)
  vs the previous round (cfad3d1, same harness; cross-round numbers reproduced within ~1% here):
    LOD0 generation p50  static 76.6 -> 65.8 ms (-14%), moving 72.4 -> 59.5 ms (-18%)
    LOD0 request p50/p95 moving 79.4/158.5 -> 67.6/137.6 ms
    worker seconds       static 39.2 -> 33.4, moving 113.7 -> 97.9
  The always-on changes carry the gain; they have no switch, so this is a cross-round comparison.

The sampler's ~12.9% "unknown" LOD0 leaf is engine code: UnrealEditor-Core.dll + RVA 0xC080,
without a Core PDB. The old FSurfaceColumn label is gone. Next round names it by its callers.

PERF-SAMPLED.md: corrected a sentence that repeated my false "daytime use" explanation.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01TaFdXhTdYMkW1xrV6ApT6Y
2026-09-13 21:00:34 +02:00
Fr0zkaandClaude Opus 5 8e40bdd92c measure(perf): in-process stack sampler; the game spends ~3/4 of worker CPU on room player-fit
A diagnostic stack-sampling profiler, off by default. A sampler thread captures the stacks of
registered generation workers with FPlatformStackWalk::CaptureThreadStackBackTrace every N us and
tags each sample with the tile's LOD. Symbolisation (inline frames included) happens after the
run, into a bounded CSV plus a summary. Registration is per tile task, never per sample; when the
sampler is off it costs one relaxed atomic load. Game: -voxel.SampleStacks=<us>. Commandlet:
-samplestacks[=us]. The streaming latency line now also prints applied tile, visible tile and
triangle counts.

Instrument checks (Codex, PERF-SAMPLED.md):
- a planted 20 ms busy loop was found at 10.5% inclusive, the expected share, then removed
- closure: 193k static / 251k moving samples, 0 capture failures, <0.75% wait frames,
  leaf resolved for 82-84%
- static game output identical with the sampler on or off: 841 tiles, 447 visible, 669,834
  triangles
- overhead at 1 ms: +4.7% static worker CPU; moving worker CPU within noise, moving timing +4-5%.
  So trust large shares, not single-digit deltas.

The finding, on the game path (the owner's instruction: profile the game, not the export):

                                all-LOD inclusive   static   moving
  BuildChunkCache                                   79.5%    80.5%
  VF_FindPlayerFitPointForRoom                      73.4%    74.0%

About three quarters of in-game worker CPU goes to player-fit searches for rooms. They are
recomputed on every per-worker room-cache rebuild, and coarse tiles span many cache windows. At
LOD0 the costs are the cave warp (3 Perlin per sample), the swept tunnel evaluated both in the
SDF and in EvaluateTunnelCoreWorld (~12% inclusive each, duplication confirmed), and the passage
structural tail (~11-14%). Candidate AABB rejection is cheap (1.5-2.2%). The 74-field params copy
does not show up as a separate cost.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01VZS94UH8bSsBeg5sZaxe2Y
2026-09-13 03:32:29 +02:00