On 05/07/2013 07:31 PM, Christian Thalinger wrote: > On May 7, 2013, at 8:04 AM, Jochen Theodorou <blackd...@gmx.org> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I am currently investigating here some performance issues and I may have >> found a culprint here - invokeExact. My case is one where method caching >> fails and I will have to do an invokeExact from Java - meaning without >> the invokedynamic bytecode and with a non constant method handle. I am >> aware of that being a non optimized path in indy, but it does not really >> look fast to me at all. Maybe compared to Reflection, but to a runtime >> generated class for the method invocation, it seems to be very very >> slow- at least on my "64-Bit Server VM (build 25.0-b14, mixed mode)" here. > Do you have any numbers? The problem is that if the MH is not constant we > can't do any inlining and it will be an out-of-line call (with a trampoline > in between). Is your DMH a static or virtual? > > -- Chris
Christian, I understand why you need a trampoline for a virtual call but why do you need a trampoline for a static call ? Rémi > >> Now.. is that commonly known? Did I see wrong? Is there a way to improve >> the speed (it is a DirectMethodHandle I am invoking already)? >> >> bye Jochen >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
