Re: RFR: 8156071: List.of: reduce array copying during creation
On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 05:07:37 GMT, Tagir F. Valeev wrote:
>> Sorry to be late to the party. I thought that all reviews labeled with
>> core-libs should be mirrored to core-libs-dev
>> mailing list but I haven't seen it there :(
>> Please note that the integrated implementation exposes listFromTrustedArray
>> to everybody. No dirty unsafe reflection is
>> necessary, only single unchecked cast:
>> static List untrustedArrayToList(T[] array) {
>> @SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
>> Function, List> finisher =
>> (Function, List>)
>> Collectors.toUnmodifiableList().finisher();
>> ArrayList list = new ArrayList<>() {
>> @Override
>> public Object[] toArray() {
>> return array;
>> }
>> };
>> return finisher.apply(list);
>> }
>>
>> This might be qualified as a security issue.
>
> This could be fixed by adding a classword check to the finisher, like this:
>
>list -> {
> if (list.getClass() !=
> ArrayList.class) {
> throw new
> IllegalArgumentException();
> }
> return (List)
> SharedSecrets.getJavaUtilCollectionAccess()
>
> .listFromTrustedArray(list.toArray());
>},
Thanks for pointing this out. I've filed bug
[JDK-8254090](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8254090). I think
we're ok as long as this gets fixed before JDK 16 ships.
I think the notification messages for this did end up on core-libs-dev, but
perhaps there were some email delays over
the weekend.
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/449
Re: RFR: 8156071: List.of: reduce array copying during creation
On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 03:10:34 GMT, Tagir F. Valeev wrote:
>> Looks good, i wondered why the performance results were so slow then i
>> looked more closely and saw "-Xint" was used. I
>> usually don't ascribe much value to micro benchmarks run in interpreter only
>> mode, but hey any shaving off startup time
>> is welcome. Less allocation is definitely welcome (although i do wish C2 was
>> better at eliding redundant array
>> initialization and allocation).
>
> Sorry to be late to the party. I thought that all reviews labeled with
> core-libs should be mirrored to core-libs-dev
> mailing list but I haven't seen it there :(
> Please note that the integrated implementation exposes listFromTrustedArray
> to everybody. No dirty unsafe reflection is
> necessary, only single unchecked cast:
> static List untrustedArrayToList(T[] array) {
> @SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
> Function, List> finisher =
> (Function, List>)
> Collectors.toUnmodifiableList().finisher();
> ArrayList list = new ArrayList<>() {
> @Override
> public Object[] toArray() {
> return array;
> }
> };
> return finisher.apply(list);
> }
>
> This might be qualified as a security issue.
This could be fixed by adding a classword check to the finisher, like this:
list -> {
if (list.getClass() != ArrayList.class)
{
throw new
IllegalArgumentException();
}
return (List)
SharedSecrets.getJavaUtilCollectionAccess()
.listFromTrustedArray(list.toArray());
},
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/449
Re: RFR: 8156071: List.of: reduce array copying during creation
On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 20:38:40 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
>> Plumb new internal static factory method to trust the array passed in,
>> avoiding unnecessary copying. JMH results for
>> the benchmark show about 15% improvement for the cases that were optimized,
>> namely the 3 to 10 fixed arg cases.
>> # VM options: -verbose:gc -XX:+UseParallelGC -Xms4g -Xmx4g --enable-preview
>> -verbose:gc -XX:+UsePara
>> llelGC -Xms4g -Xmx4g -Xint
>> # Warmup: 5 iterations, 1 s each
>> # Measurement: 5 iterations, 2 s each
>>
>> WITHOUT varargs optimization:
>>
>> Benchmark Mode Cnt Score Error Units
>> ListArgs.list00 thrpt 15 6019.539 ± 144.040 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list01 thrpt 15 1985.009 ± 40.606 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list02 thrpt 15 1854.812 ± 17.488 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list03 thrpt 15 963.866 ± 10.262 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list04 thrpt 15 908.116 ± 6.278 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list05 thrpt 15 848.607 ± 16.701 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list06 thrpt 15 822.282 ± 8.905 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list07 thrpt 15 780.057 ± 11.214 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list08 thrpt 15 745.295 ± 19.204 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list09 thrpt 15 704.596 ± 14.003 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list10 thrpt 15 696.436 ± 4.914 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list11 thrpt 15 661.908 ± 11.041 ops/ms
>>
>> WITH varargs optimization:
>>
>> Benchmark Mode Cnt ScoreError Units
>> ListArgs.list00 thrpt 15 6172.298 ± 62.736 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list01 thrpt 15 1987.724 ± 45.468 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list02 thrpt 15 1843.419 ± 10.693 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list03 thrpt 15 1126.946 ± 30.952 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list04 thrpt 15 1050.440 ± 17.859 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list05 thrpt 15 999.275 ± 23.656 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list06 thrpt 15 948.844 ± 19.615 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list07 thrpt 15 897.541 ± 15.531 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list08 thrpt 15 853.359 ± 18.755 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list09 thrpt 15 826.394 ± 8.284 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list10 thrpt 15 779.231 ± 4.104 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list11 thrpt 15 650.888 ± 3.948 ops/ms
>
> Looks good, i wondered why the performance results were so slow then i looked
> more closely and saw "-Xint" was used. I
> usually don't ascribe much value to micro benchmarks run in interpreter only
> mode, but hey any shaving off startup time
> is welcome. Less allocation is definitely welcome (although i do wish C2 was
> better at eliding redundant array
> initialization and allocation).
Sorry to be late to the party. I thought that all reviews labeled with
core-libs should be mirrored to core-libs-dev
mailing list but I haven't seen it there :(
Please note that the integrated implementation exposes listFromTrustedArray to
everybody. No dirty unsafe reflection is
necessary, only single unchecked cast:
static List untrustedArrayToList(T[] array) {
@SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
Function, List> finisher =
(Function, List>)
Collectors.toUnmodifiableList().finisher();
ArrayList list = new ArrayList<>() {
@Override
public Object[] toArray() {
return array;
}
};
return finisher.apply(list);
}
This might be qualified as a security issue.
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/449
Re: RFR: 8156071: List.of: reduce array copying during creation
On Thu, 1 Oct 2020 00:13:28 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote: > Plumb new internal static factory method to trust the array passed in, > avoiding unnecessary copying. JMH results for > the benchmark show about 15% improvement for the cases that were optimized, > namely the 3 to 10 fixed arg cases. > # VM options: -verbose:gc -XX:+UseParallelGC -Xms4g -Xmx4g --enable-preview > -verbose:gc -XX:+UsePara > llelGC -Xms4g -Xmx4g -Xint > # Warmup: 5 iterations, 1 s each > # Measurement: 5 iterations, 2 s each > > WITHOUT varargs optimization: > > Benchmark Mode Cnt Score Error Units > ListArgs.list00 thrpt 15 6019.539 ± 144.040 ops/ms > ListArgs.list01 thrpt 15 1985.009 ± 40.606 ops/ms > ListArgs.list02 thrpt 15 1854.812 ± 17.488 ops/ms > ListArgs.list03 thrpt 15 963.866 ± 10.262 ops/ms > ListArgs.list04 thrpt 15 908.116 ± 6.278 ops/ms > ListArgs.list05 thrpt 15 848.607 ± 16.701 ops/ms > ListArgs.list06 thrpt 15 822.282 ± 8.905 ops/ms > ListArgs.list07 thrpt 15 780.057 ± 11.214 ops/ms > ListArgs.list08 thrpt 15 745.295 ± 19.204 ops/ms > ListArgs.list09 thrpt 15 704.596 ± 14.003 ops/ms > ListArgs.list10 thrpt 15 696.436 ± 4.914 ops/ms > ListArgs.list11 thrpt 15 661.908 ± 11.041 ops/ms > > WITH varargs optimization: > > Benchmark Mode Cnt ScoreError Units > ListArgs.list00 thrpt 15 6172.298 ± 62.736 ops/ms > ListArgs.list01 thrpt 15 1987.724 ± 45.468 ops/ms > ListArgs.list02 thrpt 15 1843.419 ± 10.693 ops/ms > ListArgs.list03 thrpt 15 1126.946 ± 30.952 ops/ms > ListArgs.list04 thrpt 15 1050.440 ± 17.859 ops/ms > ListArgs.list05 thrpt 15 999.275 ± 23.656 ops/ms > ListArgs.list06 thrpt 15 948.844 ± 19.615 ops/ms > ListArgs.list07 thrpt 15 897.541 ± 15.531 ops/ms > ListArgs.list08 thrpt 15 853.359 ± 18.755 ops/ms > ListArgs.list09 thrpt 15 826.394 ± 8.284 ops/ms > ListArgs.list10 thrpt 15 779.231 ± 4.104 ops/ms > ListArgs.list11 thrpt 15 650.888 ± 3.948 ops/ms Looks good, i wondered why the performance results were so slow then i looked more closely and saw "-Xint" was used. I usually don't ascribe much value to micro benchmarks run in interpreter only mode, but hey any shaving off startup time is welcome. Less allocation is definitely welcome (although i do wish C2 was better at eliding redundant array initialization and allocation). - Marked as reviewed by psandoz (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/449
Re: RFR: 8156071: List.of: reduce array copying during creation
On Thu, 1 Oct 2020 06:26:39 GMT, Martin Grigorov
wrote:
>> Plumb new internal static factory method to trust the array passed in,
>> avoiding unnecessary copying. JMH results for
>> the benchmark show about 15% improvement for the cases that were optimized,
>> namely the 3 to 10 fixed arg cases.
>> # VM options: -verbose:gc -XX:+UseParallelGC -Xms4g -Xmx4g --enable-preview
>> -verbose:gc -XX:+UsePara
>> llelGC -Xms4g -Xmx4g -Xint
>> # Warmup: 5 iterations, 1 s each
>> # Measurement: 5 iterations, 2 s each
>>
>> WITHOUT varargs optimization:
>>
>> Benchmark Mode Cnt Score Error Units
>> ListArgs.list00 thrpt 15 6019.539 ± 144.040 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list01 thrpt 15 1985.009 ± 40.606 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list02 thrpt 15 1854.812 ± 17.488 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list03 thrpt 15 963.866 ± 10.262 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list04 thrpt 15 908.116 ± 6.278 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list05 thrpt 15 848.607 ± 16.701 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list06 thrpt 15 822.282 ± 8.905 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list07 thrpt 15 780.057 ± 11.214 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list08 thrpt 15 745.295 ± 19.204 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list09 thrpt 15 704.596 ± 14.003 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list10 thrpt 15 696.436 ± 4.914 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list11 thrpt 15 661.908 ± 11.041 ops/ms
>>
>> WITH varargs optimization:
>>
>> Benchmark Mode Cnt ScoreError Units
>> ListArgs.list00 thrpt 15 6172.298 ± 62.736 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list01 thrpt 15 1987.724 ± 45.468 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list02 thrpt 15 1843.419 ± 10.693 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list03 thrpt 15 1126.946 ± 30.952 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list04 thrpt 15 1050.440 ± 17.859 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list05 thrpt 15 999.275 ± 23.656 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list06 thrpt 15 948.844 ± 19.615 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list07 thrpt 15 897.541 ± 15.531 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list08 thrpt 15 853.359 ± 18.755 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list09 thrpt 15 826.394 ± 8.284 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list10 thrpt 15 779.231 ± 4.104 ops/ms
>> ListArgs.list11 thrpt 15 650.888 ± 3.948 ops/ms
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/jdk/internal/access/SharedSecrets.java line 88:
>
>> 86: if (javaUtilCollectionAccess == null) {
>> 87: try {
>> 88: Class.forName("java.util.ImmutableCollections$Access",
>> true, null);
>
> How does this work ? It attempts to load this class but
> `javaUtilCollectionAccess` is never assigned to a new value.
>
> **Update**: I just noticed this is the getter.
Yeah the SharedSecrets stuff is pretty twisted
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/449
Re: RFR: 8156071: List.of: reduce array copying during creation
On Thu, 1 Oct 2020 00:13:28 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote: > Plumb new internal static factory method to trust the array passed in, > avoiding unnecessary copying. JMH results for > the benchmark show about 15% improvement for the cases that were optimized, > namely the 3 to 10 fixed arg cases. > # VM options: -verbose:gc -XX:+UseParallelGC -Xms4g -Xmx4g --enable-preview > -verbose:gc -XX:+UsePara > llelGC -Xms4g -Xmx4g -Xint > # Warmup: 5 iterations, 1 s each > # Measurement: 5 iterations, 2 s each > > WITHOUT varargs optimization: > > Benchmark Mode Cnt Score Error Units > ListArgs.list00 thrpt 15 6019.539 ± 144.040 ops/ms > ListArgs.list01 thrpt 15 1985.009 ± 40.606 ops/ms > ListArgs.list02 thrpt 15 1854.812 ± 17.488 ops/ms > ListArgs.list03 thrpt 15 963.866 ± 10.262 ops/ms > ListArgs.list04 thrpt 15 908.116 ± 6.278 ops/ms > ListArgs.list05 thrpt 15 848.607 ± 16.701 ops/ms > ListArgs.list06 thrpt 15 822.282 ± 8.905 ops/ms > ListArgs.list07 thrpt 15 780.057 ± 11.214 ops/ms > ListArgs.list08 thrpt 15 745.295 ± 19.204 ops/ms > ListArgs.list09 thrpt 15 704.596 ± 14.003 ops/ms > ListArgs.list10 thrpt 15 696.436 ± 4.914 ops/ms > ListArgs.list11 thrpt 15 661.908 ± 11.041 ops/ms > > WITH varargs optimization: > > Benchmark Mode Cnt ScoreError Units > ListArgs.list00 thrpt 15 6172.298 ± 62.736 ops/ms > ListArgs.list01 thrpt 15 1987.724 ± 45.468 ops/ms > ListArgs.list02 thrpt 15 1843.419 ± 10.693 ops/ms > ListArgs.list03 thrpt 15 1126.946 ± 30.952 ops/ms > ListArgs.list04 thrpt 15 1050.440 ± 17.859 ops/ms > ListArgs.list05 thrpt 15 999.275 ± 23.656 ops/ms > ListArgs.list06 thrpt 15 948.844 ± 19.615 ops/ms > ListArgs.list07 thrpt 15 897.541 ± 15.531 ops/ms > ListArgs.list08 thrpt 15 853.359 ± 18.755 ops/ms > ListArgs.list09 thrpt 15 826.394 ± 8.284 ops/ms > ListArgs.list10 thrpt 15 779.231 ± 4.104 ops/ms > ListArgs.list11 thrpt 15 650.888 ± 3.948 ops/ms After a hint from @cl4es I ran the benchmarks with `-prof gc`. The allocation rate is reduced by about 40% per operation in the cases where the optimization was applied. WITHOUT varargs optimization: ListArgs.list00:·gc.alloc.rate.norm thrpt5≈ 10⁻⁴ B/op ListArgs.list01:·gc.alloc.rate.norm thrpt524.000 ±0.001 B/op ListArgs.list02:·gc.alloc.rate.norm thrpt524.000 ±0.001 B/op ListArgs.list03:·gc.alloc.rate.norm thrpt580.000 ±0.001 B/op ListArgs.list04:·gc.alloc.rate.norm thrpt580.036 ±0.309 B/op ListArgs.list05:·gc.alloc.rate.norm thrpt596.037 ±0.316 B/op ListArgs.list06:·gc.alloc.rate.norm thrpt596.038 ±0.326 B/op ListArgs.list07:·gc.alloc.rate.norm thrpt5 112.042 ±0.361 B/op ListArgs.list08:·gc.alloc.rate.norm thrpt5 112.043 ±0.367 B/op ListArgs.list09:·gc.alloc.rate.norm thrpt5 128.045 ±0.385 B/op ListArgs.list10:·gc.alloc.rate.norm thrpt5 128.046 ±0.391 B/op ListArgs.list11:·gc.alloc.rate.norm thrpt5 144.047 ±0.406 B/op WITH varargs optimization: ListArgs.list00:·gc.alloc.rate.norm thrpt5≈ 10⁻⁴ B/op ListArgs.list01:·gc.alloc.rate.norm thrpt524.000 ±0.001 B/op ListArgs.list02:·gc.alloc.rate.norm thrpt524.000 ±0.001 B/op ListArgs.list03:·gc.alloc.rate.norm thrpt548.000 ±0.001 B/op ListArgs.list04:·gc.alloc.rate.norm thrpt548.000 ±0.001 B/op ListArgs.list05:·gc.alloc.rate.norm thrpt556.000 ±0.001 B/op ListArgs.list06:·gc.alloc.rate.norm thrpt556.000 ±0.001 B/op ListArgs.list07:·gc.alloc.rate.norm thrpt564.000 ±0.001 B/op ListArgs.list08:·gc.alloc.rate.norm thrpt564.000 ±0.001 B/op ListArgs.list09:·gc.alloc.rate.norm thrpt572.000 ±0.001 B/op ListArgs.list10:·gc.alloc.rate.norm thrpt572.000 ±0.001 B/op ListArgs.list11:·gc.alloc.rate.norm thrpt5 144.050 ±0.427 B/op - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/449
Re: RFR: 8156071: List.of: reduce array copying during creation
On Thu, 1 Oct 2020 00:13:28 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
> Plumb new internal static factory method to trust the array passed in,
> avoiding unnecessary copying. JMH results for
> the benchmark show about 15% improvement for the cases that were optimized,
> namely the 3 to 10 fixed arg cases.
> # VM options: -verbose:gc -XX:+UseParallelGC -Xms4g -Xmx4g --enable-preview
> -verbose:gc -XX:+UsePara
> llelGC -Xms4g -Xmx4g -Xint
> # Warmup: 5 iterations, 1 s each
> # Measurement: 5 iterations, 2 s each
>
> WITHOUT varargs optimization:
>
> Benchmark Mode Cnt Score Error Units
> ListArgs.list00 thrpt 15 6019.539 ± 144.040 ops/ms
> ListArgs.list01 thrpt 15 1985.009 ± 40.606 ops/ms
> ListArgs.list02 thrpt 15 1854.812 ± 17.488 ops/ms
> ListArgs.list03 thrpt 15 963.866 ± 10.262 ops/ms
> ListArgs.list04 thrpt 15 908.116 ± 6.278 ops/ms
> ListArgs.list05 thrpt 15 848.607 ± 16.701 ops/ms
> ListArgs.list06 thrpt 15 822.282 ± 8.905 ops/ms
> ListArgs.list07 thrpt 15 780.057 ± 11.214 ops/ms
> ListArgs.list08 thrpt 15 745.295 ± 19.204 ops/ms
> ListArgs.list09 thrpt 15 704.596 ± 14.003 ops/ms
> ListArgs.list10 thrpt 15 696.436 ± 4.914 ops/ms
> ListArgs.list11 thrpt 15 661.908 ± 11.041 ops/ms
>
> WITH varargs optimization:
>
> Benchmark Mode Cnt ScoreError Units
> ListArgs.list00 thrpt 15 6172.298 ± 62.736 ops/ms
> ListArgs.list01 thrpt 15 1987.724 ± 45.468 ops/ms
> ListArgs.list02 thrpt 15 1843.419 ± 10.693 ops/ms
> ListArgs.list03 thrpt 15 1126.946 ± 30.952 ops/ms
> ListArgs.list04 thrpt 15 1050.440 ± 17.859 ops/ms
> ListArgs.list05 thrpt 15 999.275 ± 23.656 ops/ms
> ListArgs.list06 thrpt 15 948.844 ± 19.615 ops/ms
> ListArgs.list07 thrpt 15 897.541 ± 15.531 ops/ms
> ListArgs.list08 thrpt 15 853.359 ± 18.755 ops/ms
> ListArgs.list09 thrpt 15 826.394 ± 8.284 ops/ms
> ListArgs.list10 thrpt 15 779.231 ± 4.104 ops/ms
> ListArgs.list11 thrpt 15 650.888 ± 3.948 ops/ms
src/java.base/share/classes/jdk/internal/access/SharedSecrets.java line 88:
> 86: if (javaUtilCollectionAccess == null) {
> 87: try {
> 88: Class.forName("java.util.ImmutableCollections$Access",
> true, null);
How does this work ? It attempts to load this class but
`javaUtilCollectionAccess` is never assigned to a new value.
**Update**: I just noticed this is the getter.
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/449
RFR: 8156071: List.of: reduce array copying during creation
Plumb new internal static factory method to trust the array passed in, avoiding unnecessary copying. JMH results for the benchmark show about 15% improvement for the cases that were optimized, namely the 3 to 10 fixed arg cases. # VM options: -verbose:gc -XX:+UseParallelGC -Xms4g -Xmx4g --enable-preview -verbose:gc -XX:+UsePara llelGC -Xms4g -Xmx4g -Xint # Warmup: 5 iterations, 1 s each # Measurement: 5 iterations, 2 s each WITHOUT varargs optimization: Benchmark Mode Cnt Score Error Units ListArgs.list00 thrpt 15 6019.539 ± 144.040 ops/ms ListArgs.list01 thrpt 15 1985.009 ± 40.606 ops/ms ListArgs.list02 thrpt 15 1854.812 ± 17.488 ops/ms ListArgs.list03 thrpt 15 963.866 ± 10.262 ops/ms ListArgs.list04 thrpt 15 908.116 ± 6.278 ops/ms ListArgs.list05 thrpt 15 848.607 ± 16.701 ops/ms ListArgs.list06 thrpt 15 822.282 ± 8.905 ops/ms ListArgs.list07 thrpt 15 780.057 ± 11.214 ops/ms ListArgs.list08 thrpt 15 745.295 ± 19.204 ops/ms ListArgs.list09 thrpt 15 704.596 ± 14.003 ops/ms ListArgs.list10 thrpt 15 696.436 ± 4.914 ops/ms ListArgs.list11 thrpt 15 661.908 ± 11.041 ops/ms WITH varargs optimization: Benchmark Mode Cnt ScoreError Units ListArgs.list00 thrpt 15 6172.298 ± 62.736 ops/ms ListArgs.list01 thrpt 15 1987.724 ± 45.468 ops/ms ListArgs.list02 thrpt 15 1843.419 ± 10.693 ops/ms ListArgs.list03 thrpt 15 1126.946 ± 30.952 ops/ms ListArgs.list04 thrpt 15 1050.440 ± 17.859 ops/ms ListArgs.list05 thrpt 15 999.275 ± 23.656 ops/ms ListArgs.list06 thrpt 15 948.844 ± 19.615 ops/ms ListArgs.list07 thrpt 15 897.541 ± 15.531 ops/ms ListArgs.list08 thrpt 15 853.359 ± 18.755 ops/ms ListArgs.list09 thrpt 15 826.394 ± 8.284 ops/ms ListArgs.list10 thrpt 15 779.231 ± 4.104 ops/ms ListArgs.list11 thrpt 15 650.888 ± 3.948 ops/ms - Commit messages: - 8156071: reduce varargs array creation and unnecessary copying during creation Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/449/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=jdk&pr=449&range=00 Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8156071 Stats: 203 lines in 6 files changed: 185 ins; 0 del; 18 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/449.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/449/head:pull/449 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/449
