RFR: 8073108: GHASH Intrinsics

[Anthony Scarpino]

On 02/17/2015 01:14 PM, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
> Florian's concern is valid.
>
> "Range check elimination" means that C2 moves checks from a loop. Checks
> are still present. Since 'state' array is not final we can't eliminate
> range check.

I don't understand the concern here.  The arrays are private and are 
only used by math calculations either in the same GHASH object or by the 
intrinsics.  What ranges check issues are we expecting to occur given 
they are inaccessible by an API?

> An other thing is an additional indirect load to access
> arrays elements.
>
> I would suggest to keep original code for 'subkey' and 'state' which use
> separate values instead of arrays.

By the indirect loading, you referring to the loading done by 
get_vars_from_ghash_object() in library_call.cpp?  If so, I thought it 
would be faster to load the 128bit values directly into one register 
instead of loading one long from the class to a register, shift left, 
loading the second long and xor'ing into the register.  The assembly 
code is doing the math on the whole 128bit value, while the GHASH.java 
side needs to split it into 2 values.  Putting it into an array makes in 
easy, coding wise, to access the whole 128bit value at once.

If the suggestion also is to put the 4 longs on the argument list, that 
would be 7 arguments for processBlocks, which would be ugly and not 
useful for the non-intrinsic side since GHASH.java would ignore the longs.

 >
> Regards,
> Vladimir
>
>
> On 2/17/15 1:00 PM, Anthony Scarpino wrote:
>> On 02/17/2015 12:05 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>> On 02/17/2015 08:59 PM, Anthony Scarpino wrote:
>>>> On 02/17/2015 12:57 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>>>> On 02/16/2015 10:11 PM, Anthony Scarpino wrote:
>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ascarpino/8073108/jdk/webrev/
>>>>>
>>>>> I think the “state” field in GHASH should be final.  Is C2 able to
>>>>> eliminate the array bounds checks?  (Although it's not in the inner
>>>>> loop
>>>>> and thus probably not relevant for performance.)
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure want you asking about in regard to the bounds checking?
>>>> Are
>>>> you asking about checking the bounds of "state"?
>>>
>>> state[0] and state[1]—I wonder if those expressions need array bounds
>>> checks when compiled.
>>
>> The glossary says C2 eliminates array range checking.
>> http://openjdk.java.net/groups/hotspot/docs/HotSpotGlossary.html
>>
>> Tony
>>