Skip to content

Conversation

liach
Copy link
Member

@liach liach commented Sep 26, 2025

Hotspot profiles by bytecode; as a result, some shared methods become polluted and suffer in type profiling, as described in depth in this essay by John Rose. The record methods generated by ObjectMethods::bootstrap just proved itself another victim in this RFE.

To bypass this issue, I naively generated distinct bytecode to allow distinct profiles for now. If hotspot adds any kind of split profiles exposed via internal APIs, we can migrate to such split profile and throw away these extra copies of bytecode.

In particular, in a method handle tree, each leaf method handle seems not separately profiled - for example, all DMH to Object.hashCode share the same profile regardless of their position in a MH tree, making MH trees less useful than explicitly rolled bytecode, unfortunately.

The attached benchmark should be a good demonstration of the effect of type profiling.


Progress

  • Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Reviewer)
  • Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
  • Commit message must refer to an issue

Issue

  • JDK-8366424: Missing type profiling in generated Record Object methods (Bug - P4)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/27533/head:pull/27533
$ git checkout pull/27533

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/27533
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/27533/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 27533

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 27533

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/27533.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

@liach
Copy link
Member Author

liach commented Sep 26, 2025

Initial benchmark results:

Benchmark                                  Mode  Cnt     Score    Error   Units
RecordMethodsBenchmark.equalsDistinct     thrpt   15   413.727 ±  5.317  ops/us
RecordMethodsBenchmark.equalsGenerated    thrpt   15   410.474 ±  6.298  ops/us
RecordMethodsBenchmark.equalsPolluted     thrpt   15   185.471 ±  3.800  ops/us
RecordMethodsBenchmark.hashCodeDistinct   thrpt   15  1190.923 ± 21.937  ops/us
RecordMethodsBenchmark.hashCodeGenerated  thrpt   15  1201.802 ± 20.521  ops/us
RecordMethodsBenchmark.hashCodePolluted   thrpt   15   239.675 ±  3.195  ops/us

Shows the generated method bodies benefit from type profiling.

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Sep 26, 2025

👋 Welcome back liach! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Sep 26, 2025

❗ This change is not yet ready to be integrated.
See the Progress checklist in the description for automated requirements.

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Sep 26, 2025

@liach The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:

  • core-libs

When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing list. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Sep 26, 2025
@mlbridge
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented Sep 26, 2025

Webrevs

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
core-libs [email protected] rfr Pull request is ready for review
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant