On Tue, 27 May 2025 12:03:41 GMT, Per Minborg <pminb...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> This PR builds on a concept John Rose told me about some time ago. Instead
>> of combining memory operations of various sizes, a single large and skewed
>> memory operation can be made to clean up the tail of remaining bytes.
>>
>> This has the effect of simplifying and shortening the code. The number of
>> branches to evaluate is reduced.
>>
>> It should be noted that the performance of the fill operation affects the
>> allocation of new segments (as they are zeroed out before being returned to
>> the client code).
>>
>> This PR passes tier1, tier2, and tier3 on multiple platforms.
>
> Per Minborg 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 seven additional
> commits since the last revision:
>
> - Merge branch 'master' into fill-overlap
> - Update test/micro/org/openjdk/bench/java/lang/foreign/SegmentBulkFill.java
>
> Co-authored-by: Andrey Turbanov <turban...@gmail.com>
> - Update benchmark to reflect new fill method
> - Simplify
> - Add case for long operations and break out methods
> - Correct typo in comment
> - Simplify the fill method
test/micro/org/openjdk/bench/java/lang/foreign/SegmentBulkFill.java line 98:
> 96: }
> 97:
> 98: @Fork(value = 3, jvmArgs =
> {"-Djava.lang.foreign.native.threshold.power.fill=0"})
Why did you remove this line? It's essential for correct `Unsafe` results.
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25383#discussion_r2113610553
