On Tue, 2 Aug 2022 17:48:07 GMT, Peter Levart wrote:
>> Let's wait a bit
>
> @stsypanov Do you need a sponsor or are you waiting for some other reviewer?
@plevart I don't think we need any more review for the change is simple
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/9143
On Tue, 2 Aug 2022 16:49:07 GMT, Сергей Цыпанов wrote:
>> Сергей Цыпанов has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> 8288327: Inline privateGetParameters()
>
> Let's wait a bit
@stsypanov Do you need a sponsor or are you waiting
On Thu, 30 Jun 2022 12:08:19 GMT, Сергей Цыпанов wrote:
>> If there are two threads calling `Executable.hasRealParameterData()` under
>> race and the first one writes into volatile `Executable.parameters` field
>> (doing _releasing store_) and the second thread reads non-null value from
>>
On Thu, 30 Jun 2022 12:08:19 GMT, Сергей Цыпанов wrote:
>> If there are two threads calling `Executable.hasRealParameterData()` under
>> race and the first one writes into volatile `Executable.parameters` field
>> (doing _releasing store_) and the second thread reads non-null value from
>>
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 10:06:12 GMT, Сергей Цыпанов wrote:
>> A more realistic use case would be something in the lines of checking
>> whether the method is an expected one:
>>
>>
>> @Benchmark
>> public boolean isFoo() {
>> return matches(method, "foo", int.class, String.class);
>> }
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:31:15 GMT, Peter Levart wrote:
>> ...neither is obtaining a cloned array and passing its reference to JMH's
>> black hole our usecase... Still, it seems that even part of that has some
>> advantage. I would keep the @stable annotation then.
>
> A more realistic use case
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:19:00 GMT, Peter Levart wrote:
>> hmm, is the faster getParameters (without explicit index access) a result of
>> the annotation? getParameter0 shows the documented effect but isn't quite
>> our use case here.
>
> ...neither is obtaining a cloned array and passing its
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 20:12:13 GMT, liach wrote:
>> With `static` and without `@Stable` the benchmark yields
>>
>> BenchmarkMode Cnt Score Error Units
>> AccessParamsBenchmark.getParameter0 avgt 10 1,212 ± 0,083 ns/op
>> AccessParamsBenchmark.getParameters
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 20:39:49 GMT, Сергей Цыпанов wrote:
>> @Stable is only effective if the path leading to @Stable value can be
>> constant-folded by JIT. In above test, you have an instance field Method
>> method. This can not be constant-folded, so neither can @stable fiels in the
>> Field
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 18:32:18 GMT, Peter Levart wrote:
>> @plevart I've checked it with and without `@stable`, it's the same:
>>
>> with
>> BenchmarkMode Cnt Score Error Units
>> AccessParamsBenchmark.getParameter0 avgt 50 6,196 ± 0,142 ns/op
>>
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 12:26:04 GMT, Сергей Цыпанов wrote:
>> ... I can only see the array being cloned and not accessed directly. I don't
>> belive cloning a @stable array is any different in JIT-ed code as cloning
>> normal "mutable" array unless JIT "sees" through it and scalarizes the
>>
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 10:48:32 GMT, Peter Levart wrote:
>> But, ... is any code path accessing the elements of the @Stable array by
>> constant indexes? Only in that case would the annotation have any effect on
>> the JIT-ed code. Otherwise it's just a waste of space.
>
> ... I can only see the
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 10:38:53 GMT, Peter Levart wrote:
>> Right, in that case, it should remain.
>
> But, ... is any code path accessing the elements of the @Stable array by
> constant indexes? Only in that case would the annotation have any effect on
> the JIT-ed code. Otherwise it's just a
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 10:35:11 GMT, Peter Levart wrote:
>> @plevart so should I remove it or keep as is?
>
> Right, in that case, it should remain.
But, ... is any code path accessing the elements of the @Stable array by
constant indexes? Only in that case would the annotation have any effect on
On Thu, 30 Jun 2022 12:08:19 GMT, Сергей Цыпанов wrote:
>> If there are two threads calling `Executable.hasRealParameterData()` under
>> race and the first one writes into volatile `Executable.parameters` field
>> (doing _releasing store_) and the second thread reads non-null value from
>>
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 07:27:59 GMT, Сергей Цыпанов wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/reflect/Executable.java line 457:
>>
>>> 455: private transient @Stable ParameterData parameterData;
>>> 456:
>>> 457: record ParameterData(@Stable Parameter[] parameters, boolean
>>>
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 06:12:11 GMT, Peter Levart wrote:
>> Сергей Цыпанов has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> 8288327: Inline privateGetParameters()
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/reflect/Executable.java line 457:
>
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 06:12:11 GMT, Peter Levart wrote:
>> Сергей Цыпанов has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> 8288327: Inline privateGetParameters()
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/reflect/Executable.java line 457:
>
On Thu, 30 Jun 2022 12:08:19 GMT, Сергей Цыпанов wrote:
>> If there are two threads calling `Executable.hasRealParameterData()` under
>> race and the first one writes into volatile `Executable.parameters` field
>> (doing _releasing store_) and the second thread reads non-null value from
>>
> If there are two threads calling `Executable.hasRealParameterData()` under
> race and the first one writes into volatile `Executable.parameters` field
> (doing _releasing store_) and the second thread reads non-null value from the
> same field (doing acquiring read) then it must read exactly
20 matches
Mail list logo
