RFR: 8349452: Fix performance regression for Arrays.fill() with AVX512 [v13]

[Derek White]

On Fri, 16 Jan 2026 20:14:31 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa <sparasa at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> The goal of this PR is to fix the performance regression in Arrays.fill() x86 stubs caused by masked AVX stores. The fix is to replace the masked AVX stores with store instructions without masks (i.e. unmasked stores). `fill32_masked()` and `fill64_masked()` stubs are replaced with `fill32_unmasked()` and `fill64_unmasked()` respectively.
>> 
>> To speedup unmasked stores, array fills for sizes < 64 bytes are broken down into sequences of 32B, 16B, 8B, 4B, 2B and 1B stores, depending on the size.
>> 
>> 
>> ### **Performance comparison for byte array fills in a loop for 1 million times**
>> 
>> 
>> UseAVX=3   ByteArray Size | +OptimizeFill    (Masked store   stub)     [secs] | -OptimizeFill   (No stub)   [secs] | --->This PR: +OptimizeFill   (Unmasked store   stub)   [secs]
>> -- | -- | -- | --
>> 1 | 0.46 | 0.14 | 0.189
>> 2 | 0.46 | 0.16 | 0.191
>> 3 | 0.46 | 0.176 | 0.199
>> 4 | 0.46 | 0.244 | 0.212
>> 5 | 0.46 | 0.29 | 0.364
>> 10 | 0.46 | 0.58 | 0.354
>> 15 | 0.46 | 0.42 | 0.325
>> 16 | 0.46 | 0.46 | 0.281
>> 17 | 0.21 | 0.5 | 0.365
>> 20 | 0.21 | 0.37 | 0.326
>> 25 | 0.21 | 0.59 | 0.343
>> 31 | 0.21 | 0.53 | 0.317
>> 32 | 0.21 | 0.58 | 0.249
>> 35 | 0.5 | 0.77 | 0.303
>> 40 | 0.5 | 0.61 | 0.312
>> 45 | 0.5 | 0.52 | 0.364
>> 48 | 0.5 | 0.66 | 0.283
>> 49 | 0.22 | 0.69 | 0.367
>> 50 | 0.22 | 0.78 | 0.344
>> 55 | 0.22 | 0.67 | 0.332
>> 60 | 0.22 | 0.67 | 0.312
>> 64 | 0.22 | 0.82 | 0.253
>> 70 | 0.51 | 1.1 | 0.394
>> 80 | 0.49 | 0.89 | 0.346
>> 90 | 0.225 | 0.68 | 0.385
>> 100 | 0.54 | 1.09 | 0.364
>> 110 | 0.6 | 0.98 | 0.416
>> 120 | 0.26 | 0.75 | 0.367
>> 128 | 0.266 | 1.1 | 0.342
>
> Srinivas Vamsi Parasa has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Update ALL of ArraysFill JMH micro

I'm expecting to see a small regression in a write-only fill, and a larger improvement in write+read fill, but we didn't present the data in a way that makes it easy to compare those two tests. So we should present the graphed data as a table as well. Then we can discuss how common the write+read fill case is.

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/28442#issuecomment-3781378167