RFR: 8081289: aarch64: add support for RewriteFrequentPairs in interpreter
Hi, The following webrev adds support for RewriteFrequentPairs to the template interpreter for aarch64. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~enevill/8081289/webrev.00 This was contributed by Alexander Alexeev (alexander.alexeev@caviumnetworks.com) This gives a small improvement to the interpreter on aarch64, and brings it in line with all the other ports (x86, sparc, ppc, zero) which all support RewriteFrequentPairs. I have done some performance measurement using -Xint with some micro benchmarks and I see a small improvement on each. java dhrystone: +9% embedded caffeinemark: +4% grinderbench: +1% dacapo (avrora): +1% Tested with hotspot jtreg:- Original: Test results: passed: 787; failed: 24; error: 44 With patch: Test results: passed: 785; failed: 24; error: 46 The difference in the # of errors is due to timeouts because we are running -Xint. Please review and if OK I will push. All the best, Ed.
Hi, Just a polite ping. I submitted this patch for review by a JDK9 reviewer over a week ago and there has been no response. This patch was contributed by Alexander Alexeev who is a new contributer to OpenJDK. The patch affects only _arch64 files and both Alexander and I have verified it by running JTreg hotspot with -Xint. Thanks for your help, Ed, On 27 May 2015 at 14:21, Edward Nevill <edward.nevill@linaro.org> wrote:
Hi,
The following webrev adds support for RewriteFrequentPairs to the template interpreter for aarch64.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~enevill/8081289/webrev.00
This was contributed by Alexander Alexeev ( alexander.alexeev@caviumnetworks.com)
This gives a small improvement to the interpreter on aarch64, and brings it in line with all the other ports (x86, sparc, ppc, zero) which all support RewriteFrequentPairs.
I have done some performance measurement using -Xint with some micro benchmarks and I see a small improvement on each.
java dhrystone: +9% embedded caffeinemark: +4% grinderbench: +1% dacapo (avrora): +1%
Tested with hotspot jtreg:-
Original: Test results: passed: 787; failed: 24; error: 44 With patch: Test results: passed: 785; failed: 24; error: 46
The difference in the # of errors is due to timeouts because we are running -Xint.
Please review and if OK I will push.
All the best, Ed.
participants (2)
-
Edward Nevill
-
Roland Westrelin