RFR: 8302850: Implement C1 clone intrinsic that reuses arraycopy code for primitive arrays [v10]

[Amit Kumar]

On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 09:11:40 GMT, Galder Zamarreño <galder at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Adding C1 intrinsic for primitive array clone invocations for aarch64 and x86 architectures.
>> 
>> The intrinsic includes a change to avoid zeroing the newly allocated array because its contents are copied over within the same intrinsic with arraycopy. This means that the performance of primitive array clone exceeds that of primitive array copy. As an example, here are the microbenchmark results on darwin/aarch64:
>> 
>> 
>> $ make test TEST="micro:java.lang.ArrayClone" MICRO="JAVA_OPTIONS=-XX:TieredStopAtLevel=1"
>> Benchmark                 (size)  Mode  Cnt    Score    Error  Units
>> ArrayClone.byteArraycopy       0  avgt   15    3.476 ?  0.018  ns/op
>> ArrayClone.byteArraycopy      10  avgt   15    3.740 ?  0.017  ns/op
>> ArrayClone.byteArraycopy     100  avgt   15    7.124 ?  0.010  ns/op
>> ArrayClone.byteArraycopy    1000  avgt   15   39.301 ?  0.106  ns/op
>> ArrayClone.byteClone           0  avgt   15    3.478 ?  0.008  ns/op
>> ArrayClone.byteClone          10  avgt   15    3.562 ?  0.007  ns/op
>> ArrayClone.byteClone         100  avgt   15    5.888 ?  0.206  ns/op
>> ArrayClone.byteClone        1000  avgt   15   25.762 ?  0.203  ns/op
>> ArrayClone.intArraycopy        0  avgt   15    3.199 ?  0.016  ns/op
>> ArrayClone.intArraycopy       10  avgt   15    4.521 ?  0.008  ns/op
>> ArrayClone.intArraycopy      100  avgt   15   17.429 ?  0.039  ns/op
>> ArrayClone.intArraycopy     1000  avgt   15  178.432 ?  0.777  ns/op
>> ArrayClone.intClone            0  avgt   15    3.406 ?  0.016  ns/op
>> ArrayClone.intClone           10  avgt   15    4.272 ?  0.006  ns/op
>> ArrayClone.intClone          100  avgt   15   13.110 ?  0.122  ns/op
>> ArrayClone.intClone         1000  avgt   15  113.196 ? 13.400  ns/op
>> 
>> 
>> It also includes an optimization to avoid instantiating the array copy stub in scenarios like this.
>> 
>> I run hotspot compiler tests successfully limiting them to C1 compilation darwin/aarch64, linux/x86_64 and linux/686. E.g.
>> 
>> 
>> $ make test TEST="hotspot_compiler" JTREG="JAVA_OPTIONS=-XX:TieredStopAtLevel=1"
>> ...
>>    TEST                                              TOTAL  PASS  FAIL ERROR
>>    jtreg:test/hotspot/jtreg:hotspot_compiler          1234  1234     0     0
>> 
>> 
>> One question I had is what to do about non-primitive object arrays, see my [question](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8302850?focusedId=14634879&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-14634879) on the issue. @cl4es any thoughts?
>> 
>>...
>
> Galder Zamarreño has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional commits since the last revision:
> 
>  - Use vmIntrinsics instead of vmIntrinsicID
>  - Fix formatting

Tests result is clean on s390x as well. 


command: make test TEST="hotspot_compiler" JTREG="JAVA_OPTIONS=-XX:TieredStopAtLevel=1"


==============================
Test summary
==============================
   TEST                                              TOTAL  PASS  FAIL ERROR   
   jtreg:test/hotspot/jtreg:hotspot_compiler          1167  1167     0     0   
==============================
TEST SUCCESS



command: make run-test-tier1

==============================
Test summary
==============================
   TEST                                              TOTAL  PASS  FAIL ERROR   
>> jtreg:test/hotspot/jtreg:tier1                     2153  2151     2     0 <<
>> jtreg:test/jdk:tier1                               2359  2357     2     0 <<
   jtreg:test/langtools:tier1                         4477  4477     0     0   
   jtreg:test/jaxp:tier1                                 0     0     0     0   
   jtreg:test/lib-test:tier1                            33    33     0     0   
==============================
TEST FAILURE


The failures in `tier1` were not related to this PR. Let me know if more testing is required. 
CC:@reallucy

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17667#issuecomment-2065817523