harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jim Yu" <junjie0...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [jira] Commented: (HARMONY-6056) [classlib][jit][opt][performance] Optimize heap allocations in String(String, int) constructor for JIT
Date Fri, 09 Jan 2009 03:28:49 GMT
Hi Aleksey,
The final patch is ready now. Please help to review : )

2009/1/9 Aleksey Shipilev <aleksey.shipilev@gmail.com>

> Jim,
>
> Given the optimal version is based on your patch, can you produce the
> final patch?
>
> IMO, it shouldn't include in-place conversion, rather it should be
> pure Integer.toString() optimization for now.
>
> Thanks,
> Aleksey.
>
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 5:45 PM, Jim Yu <junjie0122@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi Aleksey and Kevin,
> > It is a good news! The "jim-aleksey" patch is very awesome! I agree to
> apply
> > this patch.
> >
> > 2009/1/8 Aleksey Shipilev <aleksey.shipilev@gmail.com>
> >
> >> Hi Jim, Kevin,
> >>
> >> There are good things in both patches: Jim's one does the tricky
> >> lookup for big integers, which benefit for them; Kevin's one does
> >> division very cheaply.
> >>
> >> I had tried several implementations of radix-10 Integer.toString():
> >>  - (original) baseline, present in trunk
> >>  - (kevin) Kevin's original one from HARMONY-6056
> >>  - (kevin-aleksey) Kevin's one + guessing the buffer size
> >>  - (jim) Jim's one from HARMONY-6068
> >>  - (jim-aleksey) Jim's one + optimized division for small integers
> >>
> >> The merged patch is attached to
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-6068.
> >>
> >> The results are below. In short, Jim's patch rocks! :) It rocks even
> >> more on small integers with Kevin's ideas. The best one is
> >> "jim-aleksey", but it's too heavy to just copy-paste to String(String,
> >> int) constructor, so there's a need in in-place Integer.toString()
> >> conversion.
> >>
> >> What do you think?
> >>
> >> --------
> >> (ops/msec, the more the better)
> >>
> >> original-1024Mb:
> >> *3969, 2612, 1944, 1481, 1168,
> >> 3831, 2557, 1906, 1447, 1153,
> >> 3692, 2635, 1971, 1495, 1186,
> >> 3914, 2626, 1958, 1482, 1170,
> >> 3947, 2630, 1961, 1478, 1179,
> >>
> >> kevin-1024Mb:
> >> 5041, 3343, 2484, 1883, 1566,
> >> 5010, 3329, 2454, 1907, 1543,
> >> 5009, 3325, 2473, 1886, 1539,
> >> 4969, 3314, 2450, 1884, 1549,
> >> 4901, 3271, 2457, 1868, 1542,
> >>
> >> kevin-aleksey-1024Mb:
> >> 5041, 4043, 3364, 2867, 2340,
> >> 5010, 3962, 3368, 2852, 2333,
> >> 4993, 3992, 3318, 2857, 2303,
> >> 4953, 3997, 3318, 2847, 2313,
> >> 4946, 3947, 3311, 2841, 2303,
> >>
> >> jim-1024Mb:
> >> 4681, 3566, 3019, 2976, 2897,
> >> 4810, 3558, 3054, 2954, 2880,
> >> 4802, 3530, 2982, 2943, 2868,
> >> 4795, 3481, 2991, 2918, 2862,
> >> 4744, 3476, 2954, 2902, 2849,
> >>
> >> jim-aleksey-1024Mb:
> >> 5041, 3977, 2919, 2964, 2860,
> >> 5066, 3918, 2951, 2929, 2873,
> >> 5090, 3918, 2886, 2920, 2875,
> >> 5018, 3918, 2938, 2934, 2878,
> >> 4978, 3917, 2921, 2868, 2831,
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Aleksey.
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Jim Yu <junjie0122@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > Thanks Aleksey! I think my patch is a general solution for this case
> and
> >> has
> >> > no dependency on any optimized feature of J9 VM : )
> >> > 2009/1/8 Aleksey Shipilev <aleksey.shipilev@gmail.com>
> >> >
> >> >> That's awesome, Jim!
> >> >> Thanks for coming in :)
> >> >>
> >> >> However, you seem to be missing the point. I was talking about
> >> >> refactoring Kevin's patch to fit the stated requirements. This is
> >> >> merely because Kevin claim the patch already gives the boost for
> >> >> SPECjbb2005. Kevin already has the specialized conversion in
> >> >> String(String, int) private constructor.
> >> >>
> >> >> Nevertheless, your specialized version looks good with regards to
> >> >> performance numbers, we need to test what's better for radix-10
> >> >> conversion: Jim's version or Kevin's one now.
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks a lot,
> >> >> Aleksey.
> >> >>
> >> >> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 12:11 PM, Jim Yu <junjie0122@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >> > Hi Aleksey,
> >> >> > I very agree with you and I have implemented an optimized algorithm
> >> for
> >> >> > Integer.toString(int) method. Thanks to your benchmark, here are
> the
> >> test
> >> >> > results[1] on my windows platform.  I've raised a JIRA at
> >> >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-6068
> >> >> > [1]
> >> >> > Result for Harmony java6 branch:
> >> >> > (String)base + (int)add:
> >> >> > -------------------------------------------
> >> >> >  base length (vars with rows): 0..2..10
> >> >> >  add length (vars with cols): 0..2..10
> >> >> >
> >> >> >  loop duration = 100 msecs
> >> >> >  target variance = 0.05
> >> >> >
> >> >> > ops/msec, the more the better:
> >> >> > 6721, 6096, *4650, *3846, *3178,
> >> >> > *8080, *5833, *4447, 3731, 3048,
> >> >> > *7985, *5848, 4788, 3727, *3114,
> >> >> > *7891, 5592, *4389, *3560, 3048,
> >> >> > 8388, 5607, *4522, 3727, 3051,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > After applied my patch:
> >> >> > (String)base + (int)add:
> >> >> > -------------------------------------------
> >> >> >  base length (vars with rows): 0..2..10
> >> >> >  add length (vars with cols): 0..2..10
> >> >> >
> >> >> >  loop duration = 100 msecs
> >> >> >  target variance = 0.05
> >> >> >
> >> >> > ops/msec, the more the better:
> >> >> > 8322, 6721, 4791, 4788, 4788,
> >> >> > 8388, 6721, 5156, *5012, 4797,
> >> >> > 8388, 6707, 5161, *4963, 4795,
> >> >> > 8388, 6707, *5126, 4802, 4788,
> >> >> > *8048, 6700, *5021, 4802, *4687,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > 2009/1/7 Aleksey Shipilev <aleksey.shipilev@gmail.com>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> Ok, we can implement the in-place Integer.toString() and
> specialize
> >> >> >> the radix-10 conversion in Integer. Then Classlib performance
guys
> >> >> >> might use the inplace conversion to optimize StringBuilder
> >> performance
> >> >> >> or even catch the concatenation like J9 does.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> My idea is to share whatever optimization between all VMs
that use
> >> the
> >> >> >> Classlib.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >> >> Aleksey.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 5:46 PM, Tim Ellison <
> t.p.ellison@gmail.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> > Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
> >> >> >> >> Am I understanding right that private String(String,
int) is
> >> inlined
> >> >> >> >> by J9 JIT when (String)s1 + (int)v1 is required?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Yes - so for DRLVM, Kevin's patch in HARMONY-6056 will
be
> impotent.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Regards,
> >> >> >> > Tim
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > --
> >> >> > Best Regards,
> >> >> > Jim, Jun Jie Yu
> >> >> >
> >> >> > China Software Development Lab, IBM
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Best Regards,
> >> > Jim, Jun Jie Yu
> >> >
> >> > China Software Development Lab, IBM
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best Regards,
> > Jim, Jun Jie Yu
> >
> > China Software Development Lab, IBM
> >
>



-- 
Best Regards,
Jim, Jun Jie Yu

China Software Development Lab, IBM

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message