> Can I please get reviews for this PR? 
> 
> The most common and frequent use of NonEscaping Phis merging object 
> allocations is for debugging information. The two graphs below show numbers 
> for Renaissance and DaCapo benchmarks - similar results are obtained for all 
> other applications that I tested.
> 
> With what frequency does each IR node type occurs as an allocation merge 
> user? I.e., if the same node type uses a Phi N times the counter is 
> incremented by N:
> 
> ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2249648/222280517-4dcf5871-2564-4207-b49e-22aee47fa49d.png)
> 
> What are the most common users of allocation merges? I.e., if the same node 
> type uses a Phi N times the counter is incremented by 1:
> 
> ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2249648/222280608-ca742a4e-1622-4e69-a778-e4db6805ea02.png)
> 
> This PR adds support scalar replacing allocations participating in merges 
> that are used as debug information OR as a base for field loads. I plan to 
> create subsequent PRs to enable scalar replacement of merges used by other 
> node types (CmpP is next on the list) subsequently.
> 
> The approach I used for _rematerialization_ is pretty straightforward. It 
> consists basically in: 1) Extend SafePointScalarObjectNode to represent 
> multiple SR objects; 2) Add a new Class to support rematerialization of SR 
> objects part of merges; 3) Patch HotSpot to be able to serialize and 
> deserialize debug information related to allocation merges; 4) Patch C2 to 
> generate unique types for SR objects participating in some allocation merges.
> 
> The approach I used for _enabling the scalar replacement of some of the 
> inputs of the allocation merge_ is also pretty straight forward: call 
> `MemNode::split_through_phi` to, well, split AddP->Load* through the merge 
> which will render the Phi useless.
> 
> I tested this with JTREG tests tier 1-4 (Windows, Linux, and Mac) and didn't 
> see regression. I also tested with several applications and didn't see any 
> failure. I also ran tests with "-ea -esa -Xbatch -Xcomp 
> -XX:+UnlockExperimentalVMOptions -XX:-TieredCompilation -server 
> -XX:+IgnoreUnrecognizedVMOptions -XX:+UnlockDiagnosticVMOptions 
> -XX:+StressLCM -XX:+StressGCM -XX:+StressCCP" and didn't observe any related 
> failures.

Cesar Soares Lucas has updated the pull request incrementally with one 
additional commit since the last revision:

  Addressing PR review 2: refactor & reuse MacroExpand::scalar_replacement 
method.

-------------

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/12897/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/12897/files/5ef86371..3752b21a

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=12897&range=05
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=12897&range=04-05

  Stats: 346 lines in 3 files changed: 113 ins; 106 del; 127 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/12897.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/12897/head:pull/12897

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/12897

Reply via email to