前文最后说，CinderX报错不能用，这不对，我在其github存储库上提了这个issue，alexmalyshev回复
I think that's actually just a warning that you're getting but things should be working after that?Right, this is just a logged warning that CinderX tried to enable huge pages but wasn't able to. It falls back to using normal pages.
（我认为那实际上只是一个警告，在那之后一切应该仍能正常运行？是的，这只是一个记录在案的警告，表示 CinderX 尝试启用大页但未能成功，因此它会回退到使用普通页面。）
下面是测试结果
nbs@kylin-pc:~/par$ sudo docker start gcc142
输入密码
gcc142
nbs@kylin-pc:~/par$ sudo docker exec -it gcc142 bash
root@kylin-pc:/# cd /par/uv314
root@kylin-pc:/par/uv314# source .venv/bin/activate
cinderx.jit.compile_after_n_calls(1)
(uv314) root@kylin-pc:/par/uv314# time python ../pe932e.py
JIT: /par/cinderx-2026.3.30.0/cinderx/Jit/code_allocator.cpp:62 -- Failed to madvise [0x7fa1ffc000, 0x7fa21fc000) with MADV_HUGEPAGE, errno=22
T(16) = 72673459417881349.time=18.62825632095337
T(16) = 72673459417881349.time=9.188195705413818
real 0m27.987s
user 0m27.694s
sys 0m0.047s
-- cinderx.jit.compile_after_n_calls(0)
(uv314) root@kylin-pc:/par/uv314# time python ../pe932e.py
JIT: /par/cinderx-2026.3.30.0/cinderx/Jit/code_allocator.cpp:62 -- Failed to madvise [0x7fa0cdc000, 0x7fa0edc000) with MADV_HUGEPAGE, errno=22
T(16) = 72673459417881349.time=11.874915599822998
T(16) = 72673459417881349.time=12.66346549987793
real 0m24.587s
user 0m24.465s
sys 0m0.012s可见不管是cinderx.jit.compile_after_n_calls(1)还是cinderx.jit.compile_after_n_calls(0)，JIT后都比原始版本提速了。关于这个问题，我也发issue提问了。alexmalyshev回复
There could be a number of reasons for this, but most likely it's because letting functions run through the interpreter once allows the CPython adaptive interpreter to emit specialized opcodes (e.g. BINARY_OP_ADD_INT instead of BINARY_OP) and CinderX can make use of that to generate faster code. Feel free to run with PYTHONJITDUMPFINALHIR=1 in your environment to compare CinderX's internal representation for each function between the two runs.
In general we don't recommend compile_after_n_calls(0) for general usage as it's not meant to be performant. It's primarily helpful to test CinderX compatibility for your code.
（出现这种情况可能有多种原因，但最有可能的是：让函数通过解释器运行一次，能使 CPython 的自适应解释器发出特化的操作码（例如
BINARY_OP_ADD_INT而非BINARY_OP），而 CinderX 可以利用这一点来生成更快的代码。你可以在环境中设置PYTHONJITDUMPFINALHIR=1来比较两次运行之间 CinderX 对每个函数的内部表示差异。一般来说，我们不建议在日常使用中设置
compile_after_n_calls(0)，因为这样做的目的并不是为了追求性能。它主要用于帮助你测试代码与 CinderX 的兼容性。）
我也用他建议的PYTHONJITDUMPFINALHIR=1参数测试了，确实两者输出的内部表示差别很大。compile_after_n_calls(0)的输出非常冗长，不像认真优化过的。
还有两个方法：cinderx.jit.force_compile(fun)和cinderx.jit.lazy_compile(fun), 分别是立即编译和延迟编译，它们俩的效果没太大区别，都和compile_after_n_calls(1)的加速比一致。
(uv314) root@kylin-pc:/par/uv314# time python ../pe932d.py
N=2499500025000000, a=24995000, b=25000000, k=8, s=49995000
T(16) = 72673459417881349,time=14.928523063659668
real 0m14.948s
user 0m14.871s
sys 0m0.004s
(uv314) root@kylin-pc:/par/uv314#
(uv314) root@kylin-pc:/par/uv314# time python ../pe932e.py
JIT: /par/cinderx-2026.3.30.0/cinderx/Jit/code_allocator.cpp:62 -- Failed to madvise [0x7fbbb7c000, 0x7fbbd7c000) with MADV_HUGEPAGE, errno=22
T(16) = 72673459417881349.time=14.70127558708191
cinderx.jit.force_compile(solve_T16)
T(16) = 72673459417881349.time=8.867673873901367
real 0m23.639s
user 0m23.529s
sys 0m0.012s
(uv314) root@kylin-pc:/par/uv314# time python ../pe932e.py
JIT: /par/cinderx-2026.3.30.0/cinderx/Jit/code_allocator.cpp:62 -- Failed to madvise [0x7fa909c000, 0x7fa929c000) with MADV_HUGEPAGE, errno=22
T(16) = 72673459417881349.time=14.878132820129395
cinderx.jit.lazy_compile(solve_T16)
T(16) = 72673459417881349.time=9.286654710769653
real 0m24.211s
user 0m24.080s
sys 0m0.024s