Thank you, Rustem! I was wondered with these results too. It's my fault; I actually used default heap size for SPECjbb.
It means that real gain is much lower. But if these modifications affect native part only, and its effect is significant, I think it can be reasonable anyway. Evgueni, One of hotspots I've found is using properties is verifier. It checks verifier flags every time when invoked. AFAIK, the count of properties is incomparably fewer than count of strings parsed from class constant pools. And loader_env->string_pool is already used to store constant strings, the names of loaded libraries in natives support for example. 2007/5/11, Rustem Rafikov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hi All, Indeed, ~95% of time we spend in jitted code when running jbb2005. Other %% are spreaded among native code, no one module takes > 2-3%. I've just cheked the patch on jbb2005 @ win32 (prescott and woodcrest, both gvc4.1 and gcv5) and linux64 (woodcrest, gcv4.1). 1.5G heap was used. No boost has been measured. All difference is in uncertainty range (< 1%). An assumption may be that 2.41% boost was measured with default heap size and impact of native code was higher in this case. -- Thanks, Rustem
-- Ilya
