On Mon, 20 Nov 2023 16:24:31 GMT, Glavo <d...@openjdk.org> wrote: >> Using `ByteArrayLittleEndian` is simpler and faster. >> >> `make test TEST="micro:java.util.zip.ZipFileOpen"`: >> >> >> Benchmark (size) Mode Cnt Score Error >> Units >> - ZipFileOpen.openCloseZipFile 512 avgt 15 39052.832 ± 107.496 >> ns/op >> + ZipFileOpen.openCloseZipFile 512 avgt 15 36275.539 ± 663.193 >> ns/op >> - ZipFileOpen.openCloseZipFile 1024 avgt 15 77106.494 ± 4159.300 >> ns/op >> + ZipFileOpen.openCloseZipFile 1024 avgt 15 71955.013 ± 2296.050 >> ns/op > > Glavo has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a > rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes brought in by > the merge/rebase. The pull request contains six additional commits since the > last revision: > > - Merge branch 'openjdk:master' into zip-utils > - Merge branch 'openjdk:master' into zip-utils > - Merge branch 'openjdk:master' into zip-utils > - Merge branch 'openjdk:master' into zip-utils > - Merge branch 'openjdk:master' into zip-utils > - use ByteArrayLittleEndian in ZipUtils
> Hello Glavo, I see that you are interested in pursuing this change further. > Would you mind getting the latest micro benchmark numbers which this proposed > change? I see that your PR description has a run from some time back, getting > a latest one would be useful. > > Additionally, I see that #14636 where you had proposed a test case for the > `ByteArrayLittleEndian` class (in addition to other things) got closed > without being integrated. Would you mind adding a new test case for that > class as part of this current PR since you have a few more new methods being > added to that class? I've moved those changes into this PR and am running tests. I'll push these changes once the tests are finished running. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/14632#issuecomment-1894037304
