On Tue, 30 Mar 2021 03:24:16 GMT, Dong Bo <don...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>>> I think I can rewrite this part as loops. >>> With an intial implemention, we can have almost half of the code size >>> reduced (1312B -> 748B). Sounds OK to you? >> >> Sounds great, but I'm still somewhat concerned that the non-SIMD case only >> offers 3-12% performance gain. Make it just 748 bytes, and therefore not >> icache-hostile, then perhaps the balance of risk and reward is justified. > >> > With an intial implemention, we can have almost half of the code size >> > reduced (1312B -> 748B). Sounds OK to you? >> >> Sounds great, but I'm still somewhat concerned that the non-SIMD case only >> offers 3-12% performance gain. Make it just 748 bytes, and therefore not >> icache-hostile, then perhaps the balance of risk and reward is justified. > > Hi, @theRealAph @nick-arm > > The code is updated. The error handling in SIMD case was rewriten as loops. > > Also combined the two non-SIMD code blocks into one. > Due to we have only one non-SIMD loop now, it is moved into > `generate_base64_decodeBlock`. > The size of the stub is 692 bytes, the non-SIMD loop takes about 92 bytes if > my calculation is right. > > Verified with tests `test/jdk/java/util/Base64/` and > `compiler/intrinsics/base64/TestBase64.java`. > Compared with previous implementation, the performance changes are negligible. > > Other comments are addressed too. Thanks. PING... Any suggestions on the updated commit? ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3228
