Missing evaluation on bugs 6914095, 6914113, 6933327, 6935994

[Ulf Zibis]

Am 11.10.2011 18:30, schrieb Vitaly Davidovich:
>
> On your last one, have you checked to see if it makes a difference? I believe using partial 
> registers requires a prefix on the op, making the instruction larger.  Also there are some partial 
> register stalls that can be triggered.
>
How should I check this?
I can't force Hotspot to compile like this to compare the effect.

-Ulf


> On Oct 11, 2011 12:00 PM, "Ulf Zibis" <Ulf.Zibis at gmx.de <mailto:Ulf.Zibis at gmx.de>> wrote:
>
>     Hi,
>
>     some time ago I have submitted these bugs:
>
>     6914095 <http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6914095> - HotSpot should reuse
>     invariant loop parameter
>     6914113 <http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6914113> - Copy int to byte[] in 1
>     step
>     6933327 <http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6933327> - Use shifted addressing
>     modes instead of shift instuctions
>     6935994 <http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6935994> - Use as less bits as
>     necessary
>
>     I do not see, why they have been closed as "Will Not Fix".
>
>     Can someone add content to the 'evaluation' section, or at least explain reasons here?
>
>     Much thanks,
>
>     -Ulf
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/attachments/20111013/eb1766d5/attachment.html