On Thu, 16 May 2024 14:11:47 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
> > > Do we have any performance tests available to see if there are any
> > > potential impacts?
> >
> >
> > I've run all micro benchmarks whose name match `LoopOver*`. No regression
> > was found. Few benchmarks seems a tad faste
On Wed, 22 May 2024 21:03:57 GMT, Jorn Vernee wrote:
>> Maurizio Cimadamore has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Fix typo in javadoc
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/invoke/X-VarHandleSegmentView.java.template
> line
On Tue, 21 May 2024 10:20:27 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> When creating a nested memory access var handle, we ensure that the segment
>> is accessed at the correct alignment for the root layout being accessed. But
>> we do not ensure that the segment has at least the size of the accessed
On Tue, 21 May 2024 10:20:27 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> When creating a nested memory access var handle, we ensure that the segment
>> is accessed at the correct alignment for the root layout being accessed. But
>> we do not ensure that the segment has at least the size of the accessed
> When creating a nested memory access var handle, we ensure that the segment
> is accessed at the correct alignment for the root layout being accessed. But
> we do not ensure that the segment has at least the size of the accessed root
> layout. Example:
>
>
> MemoryLayout LAYOUT = sequenceLay
On Mon, 20 May 2024 16:42:19 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
> some additional overhead e.g.,
>
> ```
> if (derefAdapters.length == 0) {
> // insert align check for the root layout on the initial MS +
> offset
> List> coordinateTypes = handle.coordinateTypes();
>
On Mon, 20 May 2024 16:31:18 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>
> Ah, got it. You mean more support in VarHandleGuards. Yes, I have a separate
> patch for that (actually had that for quite a while), but we're not super
> sure how to evaluate what impact it has :-)
Ah, i did not realize that.
On Mon, 20 May 2024 09:45:31 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
> > Separately, we might be missing a few long argument accepting guard methods
> > for simpler cases as I suspect they are still focused more on int index
> > types.
>
> Not sure I understand what guard methods you are referring to
On Fri, 17 May 2024 23:42:17 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
> Separately, we might be missing a few long argument accepting guard methods
> for simpler cases as I suspect they are still focused more on int index types.
Not sure I understand what guard methods you are referring to here?
-
On Thu, 16 May 2024 14:37:15 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> When creating a nested memory access var handle, we ensure that the segment
>> is accessed at the correct alignment for the root layout being accessed. But
>> we do not ensure that the segment has at least the size of the accessed
On Fri, 17 May 2024 15:54:04 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
>> Maurizio Cimadamore has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Fix copyrights
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/foreign/MemoryLayout.java line 630:
>
>> 628: *
On Thu, 16 May 2024 14:37:15 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> When creating a nested memory access var handle, we ensure that the segment
>> is accessed at the correct alignment for the root layout being accessed. But
>> we do not ensure that the segment has at least the size of the accessed
> When creating a nested memory access var handle, we ensure that the segment
> is accessed at the correct alignment for the root layout being accessed. But
> we do not ensure that the segment has at least the size of the accessed root
> layout. Example:
>
>
> MemoryLayout LAYOUT = sequenceLay
On Thu, 16 May 2024 14:34:41 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> When creating a nested memory access var handle, we ensure that the segment
>> is accessed at the correct alignment for the root layout being accessed. But
>> we do not ensure that the segment has at least the size of the accessed
On Thu, 16 May 2024 13:55:15 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
> > Do we have any performance tests available to see if there are any
> > potential impacts?
>
> I've run all micro benchmarks whose name match `LoopOver*`. No regression was
> found. Few benchmarks seems a tad faster, but the perc
On Thu, 16 May 2024 11:18:18 GMT, Per Minborg wrote:
> Do we have any performance tests available to see if there are any potential
> impacts?
I've run all micro benchmarks whose name match `LoopOver*`. No regression was
found. Few benchmarks seems a tad faster, but the percentages are so tiny
On Wed, 15 May 2024 15:43:45 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
> When creating a nested memory access var handle, we ensure that the segment
> is accessed at the correct alignment for the root layout being accessed. But
> we do not ensure that the segment has at least the size of the accessed ro
On Thu, 16 May 2024 10:54:15 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> When creating a nested memory access var handle, we ensure that the segment
>> is accessed at the correct alignment for the root layout being accessed. But
>> we do not ensure that the segment has at least the size of the accessed
On Wed, 15 May 2024 15:43:45 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
> When creating a nested memory access var handle, we ensure that the segment
> is accessed at the correct alignment for the root layout being accessed. But
> we do not ensure that the segment has at least the size of the accessed ro
19 matches
Mail list logo
