On 05/20/2011 11:08 PM, Tom Rodriguez wrote: > Is it the inlining policy? I played a little with this and the current > default policy is still not as good as the big tweaks to MaxInlineSize and > InlineSmallCode. > > tom
I tend to agree, things like isFixnumReopened and getCacheToken seem to be not inlined. Charles, do you have tested if the inline flags are tweaked ? Also I do not understand why you have JRuby's callsites like MinusCallSite in the stacktrace. You should not use it if invokedynamic is enabled. Rémi > On May 20, 2011, at 1:21 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter wrote: > >> Meh, false alarm. This is just the default empty Object[] assigned to >> all objects. I still can't explain the perf degradation. >> >> Here's the full assembly for fib_ruby: https://gist.github.com/983721 >> >> It seems like stuff is inlining, so I have no idea why performance is >> so terrible. >> >> - Charlie >> >> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 2:59 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter >> <head...@headius.com> wrote: >>> Another update...I managed to turn off the ricochet frames and have it >>> still work (???). The with-ricochet mode is faster, but still 2-3x >>> slower than no indy at all (using JRuby's IC), and 4-5x slower than >>> invokedynamic was recently... >>> >>> HOWEVER...an assembly dump I just did contains some very odd code that >>> might indicate a problem in my code. Hold the presses on digging into >>> it on your end until I can explain this. (this = apparently standing >>> up an instance variable table for Fixnum objects...*definitely* should >>> not be happening). >>> >>> 0x02868f2a: mov [eax+0x1C], ebx ;*invokespecial<init> >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.RubyBasicObject::<init>@1 (line 218) >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.RubyObject::<init>@2 (line 116) >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.RubyNumeric::<init>@2 (line 114) >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.RubyInteger::<init>@2 (line 95) >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.RubyFixnum::<init>@5 (line 112) >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.RubyFixnum::newFixnum@25 (line 173) >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.RubyFixnum::op_minus@34 (line 395) >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.runtime.callsite.MinusCallSite::call@24 (line 16) >>> 0x02868f2d: mov ebx, [esp+0x14] >>> 0x02868f31: mov ecx, [ebx+0xBC] >>> 0x02868f37: mov edx, eax >>> 0x02868f39: shr edx, 9 >>> 0x02868f3c: mov [edx+0x394000], 0x00 ;*putfield varTable >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.RubyBasicObject::<init>@8 (line 84) >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.RubyObject::<init>@2 (line 116) >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.RubyNumeric::<init>@2 (line 114) >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.RubyInteger::<init>@2 (line 95) >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.RubyFixnum::<init>@5 (line 112) >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.RubyFixnum::newFixnum@25 (line 173) >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.RubyFixnum::op_minus@34 (line 395) >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.runtime.callsite.MinusCallSite::call@24 (line 16) >>> 0x02868f43: mov edx, a 'java/lang/Class' = >>> 'org/jruby/RubyBasicObject' >>> ; {oop(a 'java/lang/Class' = >>> 'org/jruby/RubyBasicObject')} >>> 0x02868f48: mov ebx, [edx+0x68] ;*getstatic NULL_OBJECT_ARRAY >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.RubyBasicObject::<init>@5 (line 84) >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.RubyObject::<init>@2 (line 116) >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.RubyNumeric::<init>@2 (line 114) >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.RubyInteger::<init>@2 (line 95) >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.RubyFixnum::<init>@5 (line 112) >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.RubyFixnum::newFixnum@25 (line 173) >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.RubyFixnum::op_minus@34 (line 395) >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.runtime.callsite.MinusCallSite::call@24 (line 16) >>> 0x02868f4b: mov [eax+0x10], ebx >>> 0x02868f4e: lock add [esp], 0x00 ;*putfield varTable >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.RubyBasicObject::<init>@8 (line 84) >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.RubyObject::<init>@2 (line 116) >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.RubyNumeric::<init>@2 (line 114) >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.RubyInteger::<init>@2 (line 95) >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.RubyFixnum::<init>@5 (line 112) >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.RubyFixnum::newFixnum@25 (line 173) >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.RubyFixnum::op_minus@34 (line 395) >>> ; - >>> org.jruby.runtime.callsite.MinusCallSite::call@24 (line 16) >>> >>> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 8:10 AM, Charles Oliver Nutter >>> <head...@headius.com> wrote: >>>> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 1:07 AM, Ola Bini<ola.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> Try -XX:+UnlockDiag* -XX:-UseRicochetFrames for differential testing. >>>>>> >>>>>> If you can find a microbenchmark which shows differential slowdown, we >>>>>> can debug it. >>>>> When trying the above all my tests fail with this: >>>>> java.lang.RuntimeException: java.lang.InternalError: NYI >>>> Same here. >>>> >>>> Reproducing it is pretty easy... >>>> >>>> * Clone JRuby: git clone https://github.com/jruby/jruby.git >>>> * Build JRuby: cd jruby ; ant >>>> * Run benchmarks: bin/jruby bench/bench_fib_recursive.rb 10 35 >>>> >>>> There are many benchmarks under the bench dir, almost all of which >>>> show this degradation. You can disable invokedynamic use in JRuby by >>>> passing -Xcompile.invokedynamic=false, as seen here: >>>> >>>> >>>> ~/projects/jruby ➔ jruby -Xcompile.invokedynamic=false >>>> bench/bench_fib_recursive.rb 5 35 >>>> WARNING: Both jruby-complete.jar and jruby.jar are present in the >>>> 'lib' directory. Will use jruby.jar >>>> 9227465 >>>> 1.698000 0.000000 1.698000 ( 1.645000) >>>> 9227465 >>>> 1.352000 0.000000 1.352000 ( 1.352000) >>>> 9227465 >>>> 1.364000 0.000000 1.364000 ( 1.364000) >>>> 9227465 >>>> 1.344000 0.000000 1.344000 ( 1.344000) >>>> 9227465 >>>> 1.336000 0.000000 1.336000 ( 1.336000) >>>> >>>> ~/projects/jruby ➔ jruby -Xcompile.invokedynamic=true >>>> bench/bench_fib_recursive.rb 5 35 >>>> WARNING: Both jruby-complete.jar and jruby.jar are present in the >>>> 'lib' directory. Will use jruby.jar >>>> 9227465 >>>> 3.182000 0.000000 3.182000 ( 3.120000) >>>> 9227465 >>>> 3.019000 0.000000 3.019000 ( 3.019000) >>>> 9227465 >>>> 3.195000 0.000000 3.195000 ( 3.195000) >>>> 9227465 >>>> 3.163000 0.000000 3.163000 ( 3.163000) >>>> 9227465 >>>> 3.656000 0.000000 3.656000 ( 3.656000) >>>> >>>> I'm sure something's just broken...this benchmark was easily almost 2x >>>> faster than the non-invokedynamic version just a few days ago, and >>>> it's now 2-3x slower than non-indy logic. >>>> >>>> I'm going to be online all day, standing by to help in any way I can. >>>> I did do a quick LogCompilation last night and the main thing I >>>> noticed was that while it seemed like handles are inlining, the >>>> eventual DMH does not inline. That would explain some of the perf >>>> degradation, I think...but hopefully not all of it. >>>> >>>> Whatever you need me to run or whatever information...let me know. >>>> >>>> ALSO...I got the same error as Ola when running JRuby with a >>>> standalone jar file: >>>> >>>> ~/projects/jruby ➔ java -jar lib/jruby-complete.jar >>>> bench/bench_fib_recursive.rb >>>> MethodHandle.java:-1:in `invokeExact': java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: >>>> org/jruby/runtime/ThreadContext >>>> from MethodHandle.java:-1:in `invokeExact' >>>> from bench/bench_fib_recursive.rb:7:in `method__0$RUBY$fib_ruby' >>>> from bench/bench_fib_recursive.rb:7:in `method__0$RUBY$fib_ruby' >>>> from bench/bench_fib_recursive.rb:7:in `method__0$RUBY$fib_ruby' >>>> from bench/bench_fib_recursive.rb:7:in `method__0$RUBY$fib_ruby' >>>> >>>> As in Ola's case, ThreadContext is a core JRuby class. I do *not* get >>>> this error when JRuby is loaded from the bootstrap classloader, so I >>>> imagine there's some mix-up with generated bytecode and the >>>> classloaders that that bytecode gets loaded into. >>>> >>>> - Charlie >>>> >> _______________________________________________ >> mlvm-dev mailing list >> mlvm-dev@openjdk.java.net >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev > _______________________________________________ > mlvm-dev mailing list > mlvm-dev@openjdk.java.net > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev _______________________________________________ mlvm-dev mailing list mlvm-dev@openjdk.java.net http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev
