RFR: 8266622: Optimize Class.descriptorString() and Class.getCanonicalName0()
Peter Levart
plevart at openjdk.java.net
Thu May 6 16:36:50 UTC 2021
On Thu, 6 May 2021 15:20:23 GMT, Сергей Цыпанов <github.com+10835776+stsypanov at openjdk.org> wrote:
> Hello, from discussion in https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/3464 and https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/2212 it appears, that in `j.l.Class` expressions like
>
> String str = baseName.replace('.', '/') + '/' + name;
>
> are not compiled into invokedynamic-based code, but into one using `StringBuilder`.
>
> This happens due to some bootstraping issues. Currently the bytecode for the last (most often used) branch of `Class.descriptorString()` looks like
>
> public sb()Ljava/lang/String;
> L0
> LINENUMBER 21 L0
> NEW java/lang/StringBuilder
> DUP
> INVOKESPECIAL java/lang/StringBuilder.<init> ()V
> ASTORE 1
> L1
> LINENUMBER 23 L1
> ALOAD 1
> LDC "a"
> INVOKEVIRTUAL java/lang/StringBuilder.append (Ljava/lang/String;)Ljava/lang/StringBuilder;
> POP
> L2
> LINENUMBER 24 L2
> ALOAD 1
> LDC "b"
> INVOKEVIRTUAL java/lang/StringBuilder.append (Ljava/lang/String;)Ljava/lang/StringBuilder;
> POP
> L3
> LINENUMBER 26 L3
> ALOAD 1
> INVOKEVIRTUAL java/lang/StringBuilder.toString ()Ljava/lang/String;
> ARETURN
>
> Here the `StringBuilder` is created with default constructor and then expands if necessary while appending.
>
> This can be improved by manually allocating `StringBuilder` of exact size. The benchmark demonstrates measurable improvement:
>
> @State(Scope.Benchmark)
> @BenchmarkMode(Mode.AverageTime)
> @OutputTimeUnit(TimeUnit.NANOSECONDS)
> @Fork(jvmArgsAppend = {"-Xms2g", "-Xmx2g"})
> public class ClassDescriptorStringBenchmark {
>
> private final Class<?> clazzWithShortDescriptor = Object.class;
> private final Class<?> clazzWithLongDescriptor = getClass();
>
> @Benchmark
> public String descriptorString_short() {
> return clazzWithShortDescriptor.descriptorString();
> }
>
> @Benchmark
> public String descriptorString_long() {
> return clazzWithLongDescriptor.descriptorString();
> }
> }
>
>
>
> original
> -Xint
> Mode Score Error Units
> descriptorString_long avgt 6326.478 ± 107.251 ns/op
> descriptorString_short avgt 5220.729 ± 103.545 ns/op
> descriptorString_long:·gc.alloc.rate.norm avgt 528.089 ± 0.021 B/op
> descriptorString_short:·gc.alloc.rate.norm avgt 232.036 ± 0.015 B/op
>
> -XX:TieredStopAtLevel=1
> Mode Score Error Units
> descriptorString_long avgt 230.223 ± 1.254 ns/op
> descriptorString_short avgt 164.255 ± 0.755 ns/op
> descriptorString_long:·gc.alloc.rate.norm avgt 528.046 ± 0.002 B/op
> descriptorString_short:·gc.alloc.rate.norm avgt 232.022 ± 0.001 B/op
>
> full
> Mode Score Error Units
> descriptorString_long avgt 74.835 ± 0.262 ns/op
> descriptorString_short avgt 43.822 ± 0.788 ns/op
> descriptorString_long:·gc.alloc.rate.norm avgt 504.010 ± 0.001 B/op
> descriptorString_short:·gc.alloc.rate.norm avgt 208.004 ± 0.001 B/op
>
> ------------------------
> patched
> -Xint
> Mode Score Error Units
> descriptorString_long avgt 4485.994 ± 60.173 ns/op
> descriptorString_short avgt 3949.965 ± 278.143 ns/op
> descriptorString_long:·gc.alloc.rate.norm avgt 336.051 ± 0.004 B/op
> descriptorString_short:·gc.alloc.rate.norm avgt 184.027 ± 0.010 B/op
>
> -XX:TieredStopAtLevel=1
> Mode Score Error Units
> descriptorString_long avgt 185.774 ± 1.100 ns/op
> descriptorString_short avgt 135.338 ± 1.066 ns/op
> descriptorString_long:·gc.alloc.rate.norm avgt 336.030 ± 0.001 B/op
> descriptorString_short:·gc.alloc.rate.norm avgt 184.019 ± 0.001 B/op
>
> full
> Mode Score Error Units
> descriptorString_long avgt 42.864 ± 0.160 ns/op
> descriptorString_short avgt 27.255 ± 0.381 ns/op
> descriptorString_long:·gc.alloc.rate.norm avgt 224.005 ± 0.001 B/op
> descriptorString_short:·gc.alloc.rate.norm avgt 120.002 ± 0.001 B/op
>
> Same can be done also for Class.isHidden() branch in Class.descriptorString() and for Class.getCanonicalName0()
Hi Sergei,
You are right that what javac generates is sub-optimal as it doesn't take into account the possible known final lenght of the string. So manually doing so is better. Since your 1st attempt a patch for String.join() method improved it quite a bit and is now not using StringBuilder under the hood any more. Could you try to measure the following:
String str = String.join("/", baseName.replace('.', '/'), name);
as an alternative to:
String str = baseName.replace('.', '/') + '/' + name;
and see how it compares?
Regards, Peter
-------------
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3903
More information about the core-libs-dev
mailing list