[8u] RFR 8130150: Implement BigInteger.montgomeryMultiply intrinsic

[Vladimir Kempik]

Hello

Will work on 8139907 next, but First I'll need to backport 
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130832 to jdk8 to make 8139907 
work.

Vladimir.

On 19.02.2016 19:39, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
> Looks good. I said it before that you need to backport 8139907 too to 
> execute tests only on platforms which have intrinsic. Or use other 
> ways to limit platforms on which execute the test.
>
> Thanks,
> Vladimir
>
> On 2/19/16 8:28 AM, Vladimir Kempik wrote:
>> Hello
>>
>> Here is updated webrev for 8130150 for jdk8.
>>
>> only hotspot part was updated.
>>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/8130150/webrev_hs.01
>>
>> Changes:
>> sharedRuntime_x86_64.cpp
>>
>> a) use asm volatile instead of __asm__
>> b) don't use montgomery_square on Solaris.
>>
>>
>> Testing: jprt, included testcase.
>> THanks, Vladimir.
>>
>> On 19.02.2016 0:05, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
>>> Okay.
>>>
>>> On 2/18/16 12:38 PM, Vladimir Kempik wrote:
>>>> Hello
>>>>
>>>> To be clear.
>>>>
>>>> I'm proposing :
>>>> 1)if(0), only for Solaris (via ifdef Solaris )
>>>> 2)volatile asm.
>>>>
>>>> That is the combination that passes all jprt tests.
>>>>
>>>> I'll prepare updated webrev a bit later this week.
>>>> Vladimir.
>>>>
>>>> Отправлено с iPad
>>>>
>>>>> 18 февр. 2016 г., в 23:25, Vladimir Kozlov 
>>>>> <vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com> написал(а):
>>>>>
>>>>> To be clear. You are proposing only the next change nothing else 
>>>>> we discussed before. Right?
>>>>>
>>>>> -  if (len >= MONTGOMERY_SQUARING_THRESHOLD) {
>>>>> +  if (0) {
>>>>>     ::montgomery_square(a, n, m, (unsigned long)inv, longwords);
>>>>>
>>>>> What about 'volatile asm'? Using C code instead of asm?
>>>>>
>>>>> In general I am fine with that since it looks like it is only 
>>>>> performance issue.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Vladimir
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2/18/16 4:16 AM, Vladimir Kempik wrote:
>>>>>> Hello
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Vladimir Kozlov, do you think I can backport this to jdk8/7 with 
>>>>>> mentioned workaround (for solaris amd64 only) and
>>>>>> then
>>>>>> create a bug to investigate why montgomery_square fails with 
>>>>>> jdk8/7 and solaris studio 12u1 compiler ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It passed the jprt tests now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If so It's ok I'll prepare.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>> On 18.02.2016 14:45, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 02/18/2016 11:41 AM, Vladimir Kempik wrote:
>>>>>>>> making this routine to always use montgomery_multiply helped to
>>>>>>>> workaround the issue
>>>>>>> OK, so possibly a bug in montgomery_square.  I'm not sure what
>>>>>>> "helped" means, though.  I guess it doesn't mean "fixes the bug".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Andrew.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>