On Tue, 9 Apr 2024 23:45:39 GMT, Scott Gibbons wrote:
> Is there any way to disable some of the optimizations C2 will attempt on the
> IR? We need to maintain atomicity, so vectorization shouldn't occur, for
> instance. This seems like a rat-hole that would need constant maintenance as
> C2
On Sun, 7 Apr 2024 05:14:08 GMT, Francesco Nigro wrote:
>> I went ahead and tried a pure-Java implementation, and it is faster for
>> small sizes (up to 8) and only about 1.5x slower for larger sizes, so that
>> might make for an interesting fallback if there is no customized assembler
>>
On Sun, 7 Apr 2024 01:49:01 GMT, Dean Long wrote:
>> Scott Gibbons has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Oops
>
> I went ahead and tried a pure-Java implementation, and it is faster for small
> sizes (up to 8) and only about
On Sat, 6 Apr 2024 00:13:26 GMT, Scott Gibbons wrote:
>> This code makes an intrinsic stub for `Unsafe::setMemory` for x86_64. See
>> [this PR](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/16760) for discussion around
>> this change.
>>
>> Overall, making this an intrinsic improves overall
> This code makes an intrinsic stub for `Unsafe::setMemory` for x86_64. See
> [this PR](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/16760) for discussion around
> this change.
>
> Overall, making this an intrinsic improves overall performance of
> `Unsafe::setMemory` by up to 4x for all buffer sizes.
