RFR: 8286279: [vectorapi] Only check index of masked lanes if offset is out of array boundary for masked store [v2]

Xiaohong Gong xgong at openjdk.java.net
Fri May 13 07:06:52 UTC 2022


On Fri, 13 May 2022 01:35:40 GMT, Xiaohong Gong <xgong at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Checking whether the indexes of masked lanes are inside of the valid memory boundary is necessary for masked vector memory access. However, this could be saved if the given offset is inside of the vector range that could make sure no IOOBE (IndexOutOfBoundaryException) happens. The masked load APIs have saved this kind of check for common cases. And this patch did the similar optimization for the masked vector store.
>> 
>> The performance for the new added store masked benchmarks improves about `1.83x ~ 2.62x` on a x86 system:
>> 
>> Benchmark                                   Before    After     Gain Units
>> StoreMaskedBenchmark.byteStoreArrayMask   12757.936 23291.118  1.826 ops/ms
>> StoreMaskedBenchmark.doubleStoreArrayMask  1520.932  3921.616  2.578 ops/ms
>> StoreMaskedBenchmark.floatStoreArrayMask   2713.031  7122.535  2.625 ops/ms
>> StoreMaskedBenchmark.intStoreArrayMask     4113.772  8220.206  1.998 ops/ms
>> StoreMaskedBenchmark.longStoreArrayMask    1993.986  4874.148  2.444 ops/ms
>> StoreMaskedBenchmark.shortStoreArrayMask   8543.593 17821.086  2.086 ops/ms
>> 
>> Similar performane gain can also be observed on ARM hardware.
>
> Xiaohong Gong has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Wrap the offset check into a static method

Thanks for the explanation! Yeah, the main problem is Java doesn't have the direct unsigned comparison. We need the function call. From the two ways you provided, I think the second `Integer.lessThanUnsigned` looks better. But I'm not sure whether this could improve the performance a lot, although the first check `a.length - vsp.length() > 0` can be hosited out side of the loop. And this might make the codes more complex for me. Maybe we can do a pre research to find a better implementation to the unsigned comparison first. Do you think so?

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/8620


More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list