On 10/02/2014 06:55 PM, Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
Small update:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vlivanov/8058892/webrev.01/

Need to reorder initialization sequence in MHI.Lazy. Initialized FILL_ARRAYS and ARRAYS are required for later MH lookups.

Additional testing:
  * jck (api/java_lang/invoke)
* jdk/java/lang/invoke, jdk/java/util/streams w/ "-ea -esa" and COMPILE_THRESHOLD={0,30}

Best regards,
Vladimir Ivanov

Hi Vladimir,

I have a comment that does not directly pertain to the code changes (the initialization of arrays) but to the sub-optimal implementation of "fillArray" methods I noticed by the way. While it is nice to use varargs "makeArray" helper method with "array" methods to construct the array, the same strategy used with "fillWithArguments" in "fillArray" methods makes a redundant array that is then copied to target array and discarded. The redundant copying has a price. Here's a benchmark (Aleksey, please bear with me):

@State(Scope.Benchmark)
public class FillArrayTest {

    private Object
        a0 = new Object(),
        a1 = new Object(),
        a2 = new Object(),
        a3 = new Object(),
        a4 = new Object(),
        a5 = new Object(),
        a6 = new Object(),
        a7 = new Object();


private static void fillWithArguments(Object[] a, int pos, Object... args) {
        System.arraycopy(args, 0, a, pos, args.length);
    }

    private static Object[] fillArray(
        Integer pos, Object[] a,
        Object a0, Object a1, Object a2, Object a3,
        Object a4, Object a5, Object a6, Object a7
    ) {
        fillWithArguments(a, pos, a0, a1, a2, a3, a4, a5, a6, a7);
        return a;
    }

    private static Object[] fillArrayAlt(
        Integer pos, Object[] a,
        Object a0, Object a1, Object a2, Object a3,
        Object a4, Object a5, Object a6, Object a7
    ) {
        int i = pos;
        a[i++] = a0;
        a[i++] = a1;
        a[i++] = a2;
        a[i++] = a3;
        a[i++] = a4;
        a[i++] = a5;
        a[i++] = a6;
        a[i++] = a7;
        return a;
    }

    @Benchmark
    public Object[] fillArray() {
        return fillArray(0, new Object[8], a0, a1, a2, a3, a4, a5, a6, a7);
    }

    @Benchmark
    public Object[] fillArrayAlt() {
return fillArrayAlt(0, new Object[8], a0, a1, a2, a3, a4, a5, a6, a7);
    }
}


The results on my i7 with JMH arguments "-i 8 -wi 5 -f 1 -gc true":

Benchmark Mode Samples Score Score error Units j.t.FillArrayTest.fillArray thrpt 8 48601447.674 5414853.634 ops/s j.t.FillArrayTest.fillArrayAlt thrpt 8 90044973.732 8713725.735 ops/s


So fillArrayAlt is nearly twice as fast...

Regards, Peter



On 10/2/14, 7:52 PM, Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vlivanov/8058892/webrev.00/
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8058892

Core j.l.i classes are preloaded during VM startup in order to avoid
possible deadlock when accessing JSR292-related functionality from
multiple threads. After LF sharing-related changes, FILL_ARRAYS and
ARRAYS are initialized too early. It affects startup time & footprint of
applications that don't use JSR292.

The fix is to move these fields into MHI.Lazy class, thus delaying their
initialization to the first usage of JSR292 API.

Testing: failing test, manual (measured HelloWorld app startup time;
compared -XX:+PrintCompilation logs)

Best regards,
Vladimir Ivanov
_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to