On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 01:53:01 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
>> This is a follow-up to PR #20273, which improves performance when the number
>> of parameters exceeds 20.
>>
>> When the number of parameters is large, the possibility of reuse will be
>> lower, so we can use the static concat method and w
On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 01:53:01 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
>> This is a follow-up to PR #20273, which improves performance when the number
>> of parameters exceeds 20.
>>
>> When the number of parameters is large, the possibility of reuse will be
>> lower, so we can use the static concat method and w
On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 01:53:01 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
>> This is a follow-up to PR #20273, which improves performance when the number
>> of parameters exceeds 20.
>>
>> When the number of parameters is large, the possibility of reuse will be
>> lower, so we can use the static concat method and w
On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 01:53:01 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
>> This is a follow-up to PR #20273, which improves performance when the number
>> of parameters exceeds 20.
>>
>> When the number of parameters is large, the possibility of reuse will be
>> lower, so we can use the static concat method and w
> This is a follow-up to PR #20273, which improves performance when the number
> of parameters exceeds 20.
>
> When the number of parameters is large, the possibility of reuse will be
> lower, so we can use the static concat method and write the length and coder
> directly into the bytecode to
On Sun, 8 Sep 2024 05:01:53 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
>> This is a follow-up to PR #20273, which improves performance when the number
>> of parameters exceeds 20.
>>
>> When the number of parameters is large, the possibility of reuse will be
>> lower, so we can use the static concat method and w
> This is a follow-up to PR #20273, which improves performance when the number
> of parameters exceeds 20.
>
> When the number of parameters is large, the possibility of reuse will be
> lower, so we can use the static concat method and write the length and coder
> directly into the bytecode to
On Fri, 6 Sep 2024 19:33:09 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
>> This is a follow-up to PR #20273, which improves performance when the number
>> of parameters exceeds 20.
>>
>> When the number of parameters is large, the possibility of reuse will be
>> lower, so we can use the static concat method and w
> This is a follow-up to PR #20273, which improves performance when the number
> of parameters exceeds 20.
>
> When the number of parameters is large, the possibility of reuse will be
> lower, so we can use the static concat method and write the length and coder
> directly into the bytecode to
On Fri, 6 Sep 2024 01:12:27 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
>> This is a follow-up to PR #20273, which improves performance when the number
>> of parameters exceeds 20.
>>
>> When the number of parameters is large, the possibility of reuse will be
>> lower, so we can use the static concat method and w
On Fri, 6 Sep 2024 01:01:11 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
>> Do I need to declare it as ACC_INTERFACE? Many utility classes do this.
>
> interface has extra restrictions that can fail class validation, such as
> fields must be public static final. So I recommend just using abstract class.
Thanks, I le
> This is a follow-up to PR #20273, which improves performance when the number
> of parameters exceeds 20.
>
> When the number of parameters is large, the possibility of reuse will be
> lower, so we can use the static concat method and write the length and coder
> directly into the bytecode to
On Fri, 6 Sep 2024 00:45:14 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/invoke/StringConcatFactory.java line
>> 1288:
>>
>>> 1286: if (staticConcat) {
>>> 1287: clb.withSuperclass(CD_Object)
>>> 1288:
> This is a follow-up to PR #20273, which improves performance when the number
> of parameters exceeds 20.
>
> When the number of parameters is large, the possibility of reuse will be
> lower, so we can use the static concat method and write the length and coder
> directly into the bytecode to
On Thu, 5 Sep 2024 23:37:30 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
>> Shaojin Wen has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 12 commits:
>>
>> - Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/master' into
>> optim_concat_factory_202408
>>
>>
On Thu, 5 Sep 2024 23:22:01 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
>> This is a follow-up to PR #20273, which improves performance when the number
>> of parameters exceeds 20.
>>
>> When the number of parameters is large, the possibility of reuse will be
>> lower, so we can use the static concat method and w
> This is a follow-up to PR #20273, which improves performance when the number
> of parameters exceeds 20.
>
> When the number of parameters is large, the possibility of reuse will be
> lower, so we can use the static concat method and write the length and coder
> directly into the bytecode to
On Mon, 26 Aug 2024 22:25:49 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
>> This is a follow-up to PR #20273, which improves performance when the number
>> of parameters exceeds 20.
>>
>> When the number of parameters is large, the possibility of reuse will be
>> lower, so we can use the static concat method and
On Mon, 26 Aug 2024 22:25:49 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
>> This is a follow-up to PR #20273, which improves performance when the number
>> of parameters exceeds 20.
>>
>> When the number of parameters is large, the possibility of reuse will be
>> lower, so we can use the static concat method and
On Mon, 26 Aug 2024 22:25:49 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
>> This is a follow-up to PR #20273, which improves performance when the number
>> of parameters exceeds 20.
>>
>> When the number of parameters is large, the possibility of reuse will be
>> lower, so we can use the static concat method and
On Mon, 26 Aug 2024 22:29:03 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
> At this time, caching is an additional overhead, and it takes longer to reach
> peak performance.
Can you elaborate on this line of thinking?
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20675#issuecomment-2311280698
On Mon, 26 Aug 2024 22:25:49 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
>> This is a follow-up to PR #20273, which improves performance when the number
>> of parameters exceeds 20.
>>
>> When the number of parameters is large, the possibility of reuse will be
>> lower, so we can use the static concat method and
> This is a follow-up to PR #20273, which improves performance when the number
> of parameters exceeds 20.
>
> When the number of parameters is large, the possibility of reuse will be
> lower, so we can use the static concat method and write the length and coder
> directly into the bytecode to
On Mon, 26 Aug 2024 20:51:35 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
>> This is a follow-up to PR #20273, which improves performance when the number
>> of parameters exceeds 20.
>>
>> When the number of parameters is large, the possibility of reuse will be
>> lower, so we can use the static concat method and
On Mon, 26 Aug 2024 20:51:35 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
>> This is a follow-up to PR #20273, which improves performance when the number
>> of parameters exceeds 20.
>>
>> When the number of parameters is large, the possibility of reuse will be
>> lower, so we can use the static concat method and
On Sun, 25 Aug 2024 13:10:41 GMT, Claes Redestad wrote:
> > If the number of parameters is greater than 2, the probability of reuse may
> > not be high. Using hard-coded constants can avoid the use of forceinline.
>
> I think this entirely depends on the application. Too low a threshold and
>
> This is a follow-up to PR #20273, which improves performance when the number
> of parameters exceeds 20.
>
> When the number of parameters is large, the possibility of reuse will be
> lower, so we can use the static concat method and write the length and coder
> directly into the bytecode to
On Sun, 25 Aug 2024 22:03:56 GMT, Markus Karg wrote:
> Could it be the case that you posted twice the exact same performance
> numbers? I do not see any actual difference in your numbers.
He did, then updated the numbers and posted this comment:
> The same data is used in the diff section abov
On Sun, 25 Aug 2024 12:12:42 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
>> This is a follow-up to PR #20273, which improves performance when the number
>> of parameters exceeds 20.
>>
>> When the number of parameters is large, the possibility of reuse will be
>> lower, so we can use the static concat method and
On Sun, 25 Aug 2024 14:29:16 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
>> This is a follow-up to PR #20273, which improves performance when the number
>> of parameters exceeds 20.
>>
>> When the number of parameters is large, the possibility of reuse will be
>> lower, so we can use the static concat method and
> This is a follow-up to PR #20273, which improves performance when the number
> of parameters exceeds 20.
>
> When the number of parameters is large, the possibility of reuse will be
> lower, so we can use the static concat method and write the length and coder
> directly into the bytecode to
On Sun, 25 Aug 2024 12:54:08 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
> If the number of parameters is greater than 2, the probability of reuse may
> not be high. Using hard-coded constants can avoid the use of forceinline.
I think this entirely depends on the application. Too low a threshold and many
applicat
On Sun, 25 Aug 2024 12:12:42 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
>> This is a follow-up to PR #20273, which improves performance when the number
>> of parameters exceeds 20.
>>
>> When the number of parameters is large, the possibility of reuse will be
>> lower, so we can use the static concat method and
On Sun, 25 Aug 2024 12:13:34 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
> > * Can we try to optimize the default generation shape further before we
> > reach for this sort of specialization?
>
> I am also thinking about this, such as the optimization of Integer/Long type
> parameters. Is this what you are talkin
On Sun, 25 Aug 2024 11:25:11 GMT, Claes Redestad wrote:
> * Can we try to optimize the default generation shape further before we reach
> for this sort of specialization?
I am also thinking about this, such as the optimization of Integer/Long type
parameters. Is this what you are talking about
> This is a follow-up to PR #20273, which improves performance when the number
> of parameters exceeds 20.
>
> When the number of parameters is large, the possibility of reuse will be
> lower, so we can use the static concat method and write the length and coder
> directly into the bytecode to
36 matches
Mail list logo
