Re: RFR: 8281146: Replace StringCoding.hasNegatives with countPositives [v15]

2022-03-15 Thread Claes Redestad
On Mon, 14 Mar 2022 20:30:51 GMT, Roger Riggs  wrote:

>> Claes Redestad has updated the pull request incrementally with one 
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>> 
>>   Fix copyright year in new test
>
> core libs String.java changes look fine.

Thanks @RogerRiggs 

I intend to push this soon regardless, but would appreciate an explicit review 
of the aarch64 changes from an aarch64 maintainer.

-

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7231


Re: RFR: 8281146: Replace StringCoding.hasNegatives with countPositives [v15]

2022-03-14 Thread Roger Riggs
On Wed, 9 Mar 2022 23:59:32 GMT, Claes Redestad  wrote:

>> I'm requesting comments and, hopefully, some help with this patch to replace 
>> `StringCoding.hasNegatives` with `countPositives`. The new method does a 
>> very similar pass, but alters the intrinsic to return the number of leading 
>> bytes in the `byte[]` range which only has positive bytes. This allows for 
>> dealing much more efficiently with those `byte[]`s that has a ASCII prefix, 
>> with no measurable cost on ASCII-only or latin1/UTF16-mostly input.
>> 
>> Microbenchmark results: 
>> https://jmh.morethan.io/?gists=428b487e92e3e47ccb7f169501600a88,3c585de7435506d3a3bdb32160fe8904
>> 
>> - Only implemented on x86 for now, but I want to verify that implementations 
>> of `countPositives` can be implemented with similar efficiency on all 
>> platforms that today implement a `hasNegatives` intrinsic (aarch64, ppc etc) 
>> before moving ahead. This pretty much means holding up this until it's 
>> implemented on all platforms, which can either contributed to this PR or as 
>> dependent follow-ups.
>> 
>> - An alternative to holding up until all platforms are on board is to allow 
>> the implementation of `StringCoding.hasNegatives` and `countPositives` to be 
>> implemented so that the non-intrinsified method calls into the intrinsified. 
>> This requires structuring the implementations differently based on which 
>> intrinsic - if any - is actually implemented. One way to do this could be to 
>> mimic how `java.nio` handles unaligned accesses and expose which intrinsic 
>> is available via `Unsafe` into a `static final` field.
>> 
>> - There are a few minor regressions (~5%) in the x86 implementation on 
>> `encode-/decodeLatin1Short`. Those regressions disappear when mixing inputs, 
>> for example `encode-/decodeShortMixed` even see a minor improvement, which 
>> makes me consider those corner case regressions with little real world 
>> implications (if you have latin1 Strings, you're likely to also have 
>> ASCII-only strings in your mix).
>
> Claes Redestad has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional 
> commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Fix copyright year in new test

core libs String.java changes look fine.

-

Marked as reviewed by rriggs (Reviewer).

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7231


Re: RFR: 8281146: Replace StringCoding.hasNegatives with countPositives [v15]

2022-03-14 Thread Claes Redestad
On Wed, 9 Mar 2022 23:59:32 GMT, Claes Redestad  wrote:

>> I'm requesting comments and, hopefully, some help with this patch to replace 
>> `StringCoding.hasNegatives` with `countPositives`. The new method does a 
>> very similar pass, but alters the intrinsic to return the number of leading 
>> bytes in the `byte[]` range which only has positive bytes. This allows for 
>> dealing much more efficiently with those `byte[]`s that has a ASCII prefix, 
>> with no measurable cost on ASCII-only or latin1/UTF16-mostly input.
>> 
>> Microbenchmark results: 
>> https://jmh.morethan.io/?gists=428b487e92e3e47ccb7f169501600a88,3c585de7435506d3a3bdb32160fe8904
>> 
>> - Only implemented on x86 for now, but I want to verify that implementations 
>> of `countPositives` can be implemented with similar efficiency on all 
>> platforms that today implement a `hasNegatives` intrinsic (aarch64, ppc etc) 
>> before moving ahead. This pretty much means holding up this until it's 
>> implemented on all platforms, which can either contributed to this PR or as 
>> dependent follow-ups.
>> 
>> - An alternative to holding up until all platforms are on board is to allow 
>> the implementation of `StringCoding.hasNegatives` and `countPositives` to be 
>> implemented so that the non-intrinsified method calls into the intrinsified. 
>> This requires structuring the implementations differently based on which 
>> intrinsic - if any - is actually implemented. One way to do this could be to 
>> mimic how `java.nio` handles unaligned accesses and expose which intrinsic 
>> is available via `Unsafe` into a `static final` field.
>> 
>> - There are a few minor regressions (~5%) in the x86 implementation on 
>> `encode-/decodeLatin1Short`. Those regressions disappear when mixing inputs, 
>> for example `encode-/decodeShortMixed` even see a minor improvement, which 
>> makes me consider those corner case regressions with little real world 
>> implications (if you have latin1 Strings, you're likely to also have 
>> ASCII-only strings in your mix).
>
> Claes Redestad has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional 
> commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Fix copyright year in new test

Gentle reminder that I need a review of the aarch64 changes.

-

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7231


Re: RFR: 8281146: Replace StringCoding.hasNegatives with countPositives [v15]

2022-03-09 Thread Claes Redestad
> I'm requesting comments and, hopefully, some help with this patch to replace 
> `StringCoding.hasNegatives` with `countPositives`. The new method does a very 
> similar pass, but alters the intrinsic to return the number of leading bytes 
> in the `byte[]` range which only has positive bytes. This allows for dealing 
> much more efficiently with those `byte[]`s that has a ASCII prefix, with no 
> measurable cost on ASCII-only or latin1/UTF16-mostly input.
> 
> Microbenchmark results: 
> https://jmh.morethan.io/?gists=428b487e92e3e47ccb7f169501600a88,3c585de7435506d3a3bdb32160fe8904
> 
> - Only implemented on x86 for now, but I want to verify that implementations 
> of `countPositives` can be implemented with similar efficiency on all 
> platforms that today implement a `hasNegatives` intrinsic (aarch64, ppc etc) 
> before moving ahead. This pretty much means holding up this until it's 
> implemented on all platforms, which can either contributed to this PR or as 
> dependent follow-ups.
> 
> - An alternative to holding up until all platforms are on board is to allow 
> the implementation of `StringCoding.hasNegatives` and `countPositives` to be 
> implemented so that the non-intrinsified method calls into the intrinsified. 
> This requires structuring the implementations differently based on which 
> intrinsic - if any - is actually implemented. One way to do this could be to 
> mimic how `java.nio` handles unaligned accesses and expose which intrinsic is 
> available via `Unsafe` into a `static final` field.
> 
> - There are a few minor regressions (~5%) in the x86 implementation on 
> `encode-/decodeLatin1Short`. Those regressions disappear when mixing inputs, 
> for example `encode-/decodeShortMixed` even see a minor improvement, which 
> makes me consider those corner case regressions with little real world 
> implications (if you have latin1 Strings, you're likely to also have 
> ASCII-only strings in your mix).

Claes Redestad has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional 
commit since the last revision:

  Fix copyright year in new test

-

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7231/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7231/files/58ee73bb..bc5a8c80

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=jdk&pr=7231&range=14
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=jdk&pr=7231&range=13-14

  Stats: 1 line in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 1 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7231.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/7231/head:pull/7231

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7231