Raffaello Giulietti wrote: > Christian Thalinger wrote: >> Raffaello Giulietti wrote: >>> * Is there a special -XX: flag to turn on inlining of methods invoked >>> via method handles? >>> * Or must something be enabled during the build of mlvm? >> No, inlining is enabled by default. Currently only DMH invokes are >> inlined, but I'm working on inlining the rest. Are you missing specific >> calls? >> > > I'm experimenting with the implementation of a Smalltalk-like language. > I'm using invokedynamic that targets a trivial stub that dispatches over > the receiver's type which finally invokes a DMH. > > A simple test shows a factor of 150-200 with respect to an ordinary > invokevirtual. That is, my Smalltalkish method invocation > implementation, although seemingly trivial, is about 2 orders of > magnitudes slower than Java's :-( That's why I'm wondering if inlining > is at work. > >
Christian, your worries were well founded. In fact, the target handler of the invokedynamic was not a direct MH but a bound MH, instead. I forgot about my own implementation :-( I have know refactored the code to make use of DMHs by storing the bound argument in an accessible location and passing it explicitly as an argument to invokedynamic. Unfortunately, I get: # # A fatal error has been detected by the Java Runtime Environment: # # Internal Error (sharedRuntime.cpp:590), pid=3632, tid=3072932752 # Error: guarantee(cb->is_adapter_blob(),"exception happened outside interpreter, nmethods and vtable stubs (1)") # # JRE version: 7.0 # Java VM: OpenJDK Server VM (16.0-b06 mixed mode linux-x86 ) A similar crash happens with -Xint enabled. Is this issue known? Thanks Raffaello _______________________________________________ mlvm-dev mailing list mlvm-dev@openjdk.java.net http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev
