[9] RFR(S): 8075136: Unnecessary sign extension for byte array access (original) (raw)

Tobias Hartmann tobias.hartmann at oracle.com
Thu Mar 19 16:29:58 UTC 2015

Thanks, Roland.

Best, Tobias

On 19.03.2015 17:25, Roland Westrelin wrote:

Here's the final webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~thartmann/8075136/webrev.05/ Looks good. Roland.

Best, Tobias On 17.03.2015 19:26, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: On 3/17/15 5:33 AM, Tobias Hartmann wrote:

On 13.03.2015 19:03, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: Looks good. What about other platforms? I see the same optimization in aarch64.ad Thanks, Vladimir. I fixed the issue on ARM64 as well. Looks like other platforms are not affected. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~thartmann/8075136/webrev.03/ Looks good for me. Please, finish discussion with Andrew Dinn to make sure he is okay with changes. Thanks, Vladimir

While verifying, I noticed that the costs of memory operands in aarch64.ad are inconsistent: The following operands have cost 0: - indirect - indIndexScaledI2L - indIndexScaled - indIndex - indOffL - indirectN - indIndexScaledOffsetIN - indIndexScaledI2LN - indIndexScaledN - indIndexN - indOffIN - indOffLN Whereas the following operands have cost 'INSNCOST': - indIndexScaledOffsetI - indIndexScaledOffsetL - indIndexScaledOffsetI2L - indOffI - indIndexScaledOffsetLN - indIndexScaledOffsetI2LN This does not make sense to me. In this case 'AddP (AddP reg (ConvI2L ireg)) off' is matched to 'addPregregext' (cost INSNCOST) and 'indOffL' (cost 0) instead of the newly added 'indIndexOffsetI2L' (cost INSNCOST) because the sum of the costs is equal. I filed JDK-8075324 [1] to take care of this. I would suggest that we set the cost of a memory operand to either 0 (if only immediates) or 10 (if more complex) like we do on x86. I verified that the patch (together with the fix for JDK-8075324) solves the issue. Before: 034 B3: # N1 <- B2 Freq: 0.999998 034 + add R10, R10, R1, sxtw # ptr 038 + ldrsbw R0, [R10, #16] # byte After: 034 B3: # N1 <- B2 Freq: 0.999998 034 + ldrsbw R0, R10, R1, #16 I2L # byte Thanks, Tobias

[1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8075324

Thanks, Vladimir On 3/13/15 7:15 AM, Tobias Hartmann wrote: Hi, please review the following patch. https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8075136 http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~thartmann/8075136/webrev.00/ Problem: C2 adds an unnecessary 'movslq' sign extension while compiling a byte array access: public static byte accessByte(int index) { return byteArr[index]; } 0x00007f76f4747208: movslq %esi,%r11 0x00007f76f474720b: movsbl 0x10(%r10,%r11,1),%eax Where the 'movslq' is not necessary because we emit range checks guaranteeing that index %esi is not negative. For a char array access no such sign extension is created: public static char accessChar(int index) { return charArr[index]; } 0x00007fab3916b188: movzwl 0x10(%r10,%rsi,2),%eax This is because we only have matching rules to fold the corresponding ConvI2LNode in the following case: match(AddP (AddP (DecodeN reg) (LShiftL (ConvI2L idx) scale)) off); This applies to charAccess [1] but not to byteAccess [2] because the byte array access does not require a scaling factor. Solution: I added the corresponding matching rule to fold the ConvI2LNode. match(AddP (AddP (DecodeN reg) (ConvI2L idx)) off); Testing: - Testcase - JPRT Thanks, Tobias [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/secure/attachment/26108/accessChar.png [2] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/secure/attachment/26107/accessByte.png

More information about the hotspot-compiler-dev mailing list