Hi Chris,
The patch looks good.
Before the patch it made sense to have if (cl != null) in line 750 in
ObjectStreamClass, but now nothing in the if block depends on cl, so you
could use if (osc != null) instead. It is true that:
(cl != null) == (osc != null)
always holds there, but reading the code is easier that way, don't you
think? Maybe you could even consider merging the content of this if
block into the similar if block that starts in line 771?
Regards, Peter
On 6/24/20 5:46 PM, Chris Hegarty wrote:
A micro-optimisation noticed when working on JDK-8247532.
For further details see:
https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2020-June/067446.html
Webrev:
https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~chegar/8248233/webrev.00/
before:
RecordSerializationBench.deserializeClasses10avgt 10 13.874 ±1.445us/op
RecordSerializationBench.deserializeClasses 100 avgt 10
57.839 ± 3.944 us/op
RecordSerializationBench.deserializeClasses 1000 avgt 10
515.483 ± 57.275 us/op
RecordSerializationBench.deserializeRecords 10 avgt 10
13.563 ± 0.459 us/op
RecordSerializationBench.deserializeRecords 100 avgt 10
61.704 ± 2.481 us/op
RecordSerializationBench.deserializeRecords 1000 avgt 10
518.671 ± 19.147 us/op
after:
RecordSerializationBench.deserializeClasses10avgt 10 16.021 ±9.091us/op
RecordSerializationBench.deserializeClasses 100 avgt 10
58.550 ± 2.164 us/op
RecordSerializationBench.deserializeClasses 1000 avgt 10
524.930 ± 49.663 us/op
RecordSerializationBench.deserializeRecords 10 avgt 10
12.567 ± 0.711 us/op
RecordSerializationBench.deserializeRecords 100 avgt 10
50.235 ± 1.977 us/op
RecordSerializationBench.deserializeRecords 1000 avgt 10
421.557 ± 17.348 us/op
-Chris.
[1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8247532
