On Tue, 1 Jun 2021 16:29:58 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
> Looks. Later we may want to consider pushing this down as an intrinsic,
> perhaps reusing `VectorSupport.compare`.
Thanks for your review @PaulSandoz ! Yes, reusing `VectorSupport.compare` is an
alternative way to do the vectorization.
> // accumulate results, so JIT can't eliminate relevant
> computations
> m = m.and(av.eq(bv));
> }
> }
>
> return m;
> }
Xiaohong Gong has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
merge or a rebase. The increme
On Mon, 31 May 2021 10:25:26 GMT, Xiaohong Gong wrote:
> Currently `"VectorMask.eq()" `is not vectorized:
>
> public VectorMask eq(VectorMask m) {
> // FIXME: Generate good code here.
> return bOp(m, (i, a, b) -> a == b);
> }
>
> Thi
On Wed, 2 Jun 2021 07:48:47 GMT, Nils Eliasson wrote:
> Please wait until you have two reviewers before integrating.
Sure! Thanks so much for looking at this PR!
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/4272
On Thu, 3 Jun 2021 00:29:00 GMT, Sandhya Viswanathan
wrote:
> The Vector API toShuffle method can be optimized using existing vector
> conversion intrinsic.
>
> The following changes are made:
> 1) vector.toShuffle java implementation is changed to call
> VectorSupport.convert.
> 2) The
On Thu, 3 Jun 2021 00:29:00 GMT, Sandhya Viswanathan
wrote:
> The Vector API toShuffle method can be optimized using existing vector
> conversion intrinsic.
>
> The following changes are made:
> 1) vector.toShuffle java implementation is changed to call
> VectorSupport.convert.
> 2) The
Currently `"VectorMask.eq()" `is not vectorized:
public VectorMask eq(VectorMask m) {
// FIXME: Generate good code here.
return bOp(m, (i, a, b) -> a == b);
}
This can be implemented by calling `"xor(m.not())"` directly.
The performance improved about 1.4x ~ 1.9x for the
On Thu, 3 Jun 2021 18:40:09 GMT, Sandhya Viswanathan
wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/opto/vectornode.cpp line 1246:
>>
>>> 1244: return new VectorLoadMaskNode(value, out_vt);
>>> 1245: } else if (is_vector_shuffle) {
>>> 1246: if (!is_shuffle_to_vector()) {
>>
>> Hi
On Thu, 3 Jun 2021 21:43:19 GMT, Sandhya Viswanathan
wrote:
>> The Vector API toShuffle method can be optimized using existing vector
>> conversion intrinsic.
>>
>> The following changes are made:
>> 1) vector.toShuffle java implementation is changed to call
>> VectorSupport.convert.
>> 2)
On Thu, 1 Apr 2021 15:13:31 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
>> Xiaohong Gong has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Move the changing to AbstractMask.andNot and revert changes in VectorM
On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 01:50:33 GMT, Xiaohong Gong wrote:
> Currently "VectorMask.andNot()" is not vectorized:
> public VectorMask andNot(VectorMask m) {
> // FIXME: Generate good code here.
> return bOp(m, (i, a, b) -> a && !b);
On Fri, 2 Apr 2021 09:59:31 GMT, Ningsheng Jian wrote:
>> Xiaohong Gong has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Move the changing to AbstractMask.andNot and revert changes in VectorM
.length()) {
> VectorMask vmask = VectorMask.fromArray(SPECIES, mask, i);
> rm = rm.andNot(vmask);
> }
> }
> return rm;
> }
Xiaohong Gong has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
Move the changing to Abst
On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 16:42:09 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
> Would you mind updating the existing `AbstractMask.andNot` implementation?
> rather than changing `VectorMask.andNot`. That fits in with the current
> implementation pattern.
Hi @PaulSandoz , thanks for looking at this PR. I'v updated the
On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 01:50:33 GMT, Xiaohong Gong wrote:
> Currently "VectorMask.andNot()" is not vectorized:
> public VectorMask andNot(VectorMask m) {
> // FIXME: Generate good code here.
> return bOp(m, (i, a, b) -> a && !b);
On Tue, 15 Mar 2022 02:39:42 GMT, Joe Darcy wrote:
> Note that in terms of Java semantics, negation of floating point values needs
> to be implemented as subtraction from negative zero rather than positive zero:
>
> double negate(double arg) {return -0.0 - arg; }
>
> This is to handle signed
On Fri, 11 Mar 2022 06:29:22 GMT, Xiaohong Gong wrote:
> The current vector `"NEG"` is implemented with substraction a vector by zero
> in case the architecture does not support the negation instruction. And to
> fit the predicate feature for architectures that support it, t
On Wed, 2 Mar 2022 02:50:27 GMT, Xiaohong Gong wrote:
> The vector `"test"` api is implemented with vector `"compare"`. And the
> masked `"test" `is implemented with `"test(op).and(m)"` which means
> `"compare().and(m)"` finally
On Thu, 3 Mar 2022 17:40:13 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
> I guess the following: `mask.cast(IntVector.species(shape())` is more
> efficient than: `m.cast(vspecies().asIntegral()))` ?
Yeah, that's one point. Another main reason is
`m.cast(vspecies().asIntegral()))` cannot be handled well in the
The vector `"test"` api is implemented with vector `"compare"`. And the masked
`"test" `is implemented with `"test(op).and(m)"` which means
`"compare().and(m)"` finally. Since the masked vector `"compare"` has been
optimized with predicated instruction for archituctures that support the
On Wed, 2 Mar 2022 02:50:27 GMT, Xiaohong Gong wrote:
> The vector `"test"` api is implemented with vector `"compare"`. And the
> masked `"test" `is implemented with `"test(op).and(m)"` which means
> `"compare().and(m)"` finally
, z17.d
> and p0.b, p7/z, p1.b, p0.b
>
> are optimized to:
>
> mov z19.d, #0
> cmpgt p0.d, p0/z, z19.d, z17.d
>
> Also update the jtreg tests for masked` "test" ` to make sure they are hot
> enough to be compiled by c2.
Xiaohong Gong has updated the
On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 07:43:29 GMT, Jie Fu wrote:
>> Xiaohong Gong has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Add a superclass for vector negation
>
> src/hotspot/share/opto/vectornode.cpp line 1592:
>
On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 07:40:48 GMT, Jie Fu wrote:
>> The compiler can get the real type info from `Op_NegVI` that can also handle
>> the `BYTE ` and `SHORT ` basic type. I just don't want to add more new IRs
>> which also need more match rules in the ad files.
>>
>>> Is there any performance
Currently the vector load with mask when the given index happens out of the
array boundary is implemented with pure java scalar code to avoid the IOOBE
(IndexOutOfBoundaryException). This is necessary for architectures that do not
support the predicate feature. Because the masked load is
sked 1.239
> LongMaxVector.NEG1.031
> LongMaxVector.NEGMasked 1.191
>
> X86 (non AVX-512):
> BenchmarkGain
> ByteMaxVector.NEGMasked 1.254
> ShortMaxVector.NEGMasked 1.359
> IntMaxVector.NEGMasked 1.431
> LongMaxVector.NEGMasked 1.989
>
On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 18:05:56 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
>> Xiaohong Gong has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Make "degenerate_vector_integral_negate" to be "NegVI" private
>
On Fri, 11 Mar 2022 06:29:22 GMT, Xiaohong Gong wrote:
> The current vector `"NEG"` is implemented with substraction a vector by zero
> in case the architecture does not support the negation instruction. And to
> fit the predicate feature for architectures that support it, t
On Sat, 19 Mar 2022 02:34:55 GMT, Jie Fu wrote:
>> The current vector `"NEG"` is implemented with substraction a vector by zero
>> in case the architecture does not support the negation instruction. And to
>> fit the predicate feature for architectures that support it, the masked
>> vector
On Sat, 19 Mar 2022 03:11:12 GMT, Jie Fu wrote:
>>> Note that in terms of Java semantics, negation of floating point values
>>> needs to be implemented as subtraction from negative zero rather than
>>> positive zero:
>>>
>>> double negate(double arg) {return -0.0 - arg; }
>>>
>>> This is to
sked 1.239
> LongMaxVector.NEG1.031
> LongMaxVector.NEGMasked 1.191
>
> X86 (non AVX-512):
> BenchmarkGain
> ByteMaxVector.NEGMasked 1.254
> ShortMaxVector.NEGMasked 1.359
> IntMaxVector.NEGMasked 1.431
> LongMaxVector.NEGMasked 1.989
>
On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 05:05:43 GMT, Jie Fu wrote:
>> Xiaohong Gong has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Make "degenerate_vector_integral_negate" to be "NegVI" private
>
> Not
On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 09:58:23 GMT, Xiaohong Gong wrote:
>> The current vector `"NEG"` is implemented with substraction a vector by zero
>> in case the architecture does not support the negation instruction. And to
>> fit the predicate feature for architectures
On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 10:31:59 GMT, Xiaohong Gong wrote:
> Currently the vector load with mask when the given index happens out of the
> array boundary is implemented with pure java scalar code to avoid the IOOBE
> (IndexOutOfBoundaryException). This is necessary for architecture
7075.923 ops/ms
> LoadMaskedIOOBEBenchmark.longLoadArrayMaskIOOBE 119.771 330.587 ops/ms
> LoadMaskedIOOBEBenchmark.shortLoadArrayMaskIOOBE 431.961 939.301 ops/ms
>
> Similar performance gain can also be observed on 512-bit SVE system.
Xiaohong Gong has updated the pull request inc
On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 02:46:09 GMT, Xiaohong Gong wrote:
>> src/jdk.incubator.vector/share/classes/jdk/incubator/vector/ByteVector.java
>> line 2861:
>>
>>> 2859: ByteSpecies vsp = (ByteSpecies) species;
>>> 2860: if
On Sat, 9 Apr 2022 00:10:40 GMT, Sandhya Viswanathan
wrote:
>> Currently the vector load with mask when the given index happens out of the
>> array boundary is implemented with pure java scalar code to avoid the IOOBE
>> (IndexOutOfBoundaryException). This is necessary for architectures that
On Mon, 11 Apr 2022 09:04:36 GMT, Jatin Bhateja wrote:
>> The optimization for masked store is recorded to:
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8284050
>
>> The blend should be with the intended-to-store vector, so that masked lanes
>> contain the need-to-store elements and unmasked
rayMask 2713.031 7122.535 2.625 ops/ms
> StoreMaskedBenchmark.intStoreArrayMask 4113.772 8220.206 1.998 ops/ms
> StoreMaskedBenchmark.longStoreArrayMask1993.986 4874.148 2.444 ops/ms
> StoreMaskedBenchmark.shortStoreArrayMask 8543.593 17821.086 2.086 ops/ms
>
> Similar performane gain can als
On Thu, 12 May 2022 03:36:31 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
>> Thanks for the review @PaulSandoz ! For the
>> `VectorIntrinsics.checkFromIndexSize`, I'm afraid it's not suitable to be
>> used here because the `outOfBounds` exception will be thrown if the offset
>> is not inside of the valid array
On Thu, 12 May 2022 16:07:54 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
> Yes, the tests were run in debug mode. The reporting of the missing constant
> occurs for the compiled method that is called from the method where the
> constants are declared e.g.:
>
> ```
> 719 240b
On Fri, 13 May 2022 01:35:40 GMT, Xiaohong Gong wrote:
>> Checking whether the indexes of masked lanes are inside of the valid memory
>> boundary is necessary for masked vector memory access. However, this could
>> be saved if the given offset is inside of the vector ran
On Thu, 12 May 2022 09:49:17 GMT, Quan Anh Mai wrote:
> Maybe we could use `a.length - vsp.length() > 0 && offset u< a.length -
> vsp.length()` which would hoist the first check outside of the loop. Thanks.
Thanks for the review @merykitty ! We need the check `offset >= 0` which I
think is
On Thu, 19 May 2022 08:53:31 GMT, Ningsheng Jian wrote:
>>> LUT should be generated only if UsePopCountInsturction is false
>>
>> Should there be `!UsePopCountInsturction` check then?
>>
>>> restrict the scope of flag to only scalar popcount operation
>>
>> Interesting. But AArch64 code does
rayMask 2713.031 7122.535 2.625 ops/ms
> StoreMaskedBenchmark.intStoreArrayMask 4113.772 8220.206 1.998 ops/ms
> StoreMaskedBenchmark.longStoreArrayMask1993.986 4874.148 2.444 ops/ms
> StoreMaskedBenchmark.shortStoreArrayMask 8543.593 17821.086 2.086 ops/ms
>
> Similar performane gain can als
On Tue, 31 May 2022 16:48:27 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
>> @PaulSandoz, could you please help to check whether the current version is
>> ok for you? Thanks so much!
>
> @XiaohongGong looks good, now the Vector API JEP has been integrated you will
> get a merge conflict, but it should be easier to
7075.923 ops/ms
> LoadMaskedIOOBEBenchmark.longLoadArrayMaskIOOBE 119.771 330.587 ops/ms
> LoadMaskedIOOBEBenchmark.shortLoadArrayMaskIOOBE 431.961 939.301 ops/ms
>
> Similar performance gain can also be observed on 512-bit SVE system.
Xiaohong Gong has updated the pull reques
On Thu, 2 Jun 2022 01:49:10 GMT, Xiaohong Gong wrote:
> > @XiaohongGong Could you please rebase the branch and resolve conflicts?
>
> Sure, I'm working on this now. The patch will be updated soon. Thanks.
Resolved the conflicts. Thanks!
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.
On Fri, 13 May 2022 08:58:12 GMT, Xiaohong Gong wrote:
>> Yes, the tests were run in debug mode. The reporting of the missing constant
>> occurs for the compiled method that is called from the method where the
>> constants are declared e.g.:
>&g
On Mon, 30 May 2022 01:17:00 GMT, Xiaohong Gong wrote:
>> Xiaohong Gong has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Wrap the offset check into a static method
>
> @PaulSandoz, could you please hel
On Thu, 12 May 2022 16:07:54 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
>> Xiaohong Gong has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Rename "use_predicate" to "needs_predicate"
>
> Yes, the tests we
On Thu, 12 May 2022 03:36:31 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
>> Thanks for the review @PaulSandoz ! For the
>> `VectorIntrinsics.checkFromIndexSize`, I'm afraid it's not suitable to be
>> used here because the `outOfBounds` exception will be thrown if the offset
>> is not inside of the valid array
On Wed, 11 May 2022 19:45:55 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
> I tried your test code with the patch and logged compilation
> (`-XX:-TieredCompilation -XX:+PrintCompilation -XX:+PrintInlining
> -XX:+PrintIntrinsics -Xbatch`)
>
> For `func` the first call to `VectorSupport::loadMasked` is intrinsic
On Wed, 11 May 2022 15:10:55 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
>> Checking whether the indexes of masked lanes are inside of the valid memory
>> boundary is necessary for masked vector memory access. However, this could
>> be saved if the given offset is inside of the vector range that could make
>>
7075.923 ops/ms
> LoadMaskedIOOBEBenchmark.longLoadArrayMaskIOOBE 119.771 330.587 ops/ms
> LoadMaskedIOOBEBenchmark.shortLoadArrayMaskIOOBE 431.961 939.301 ops/ms
>
> Similar performance gain can also be observed on 512-bit SVE system.
Xiaohong Gong has updated the pull req
On Fri, 13 May 2022 01:35:40 GMT, Xiaohong Gong wrote:
>> Checking whether the indexes of masked lanes are inside of the valid memory
>> boundary is necessary for masked vector memory access. However, this could
>> be saved if the given offset is inside of the vector ran
On Tue, 31 May 2022 16:48:27 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
>> @PaulSandoz, could you please help to check whether the current version is
>> ok for you? Thanks so much!
>
> @XiaohongGong looks good, now the Vector API JEP has been integrated you will
> get a merge conflict, but it should be easier to
7075.923 ops/ms
> LoadMaskedIOOBEBenchmark.longLoadArrayMaskIOOBE 119.771 330.587 ops/ms
> LoadMaskedIOOBEBenchmark.shortLoadArrayMaskIOOBE 431.961 939.301 ops/ms
>
> Similar performance gain can also be observed on 512-bit SVE system.
Xiaohong Gong has updated the pull requ
On Mon, 6 Jun 2022 10:40:45 GMT, Jatin Bhateja wrote:
>> Xiaohong Gong has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains five commits:
>>
>> - Merge branch 'jdk:master' into JDK-8283667
>> - Use inte
On Mon, 6 Jun 2022 15:41:06 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
> Looks good. As a follow on PR I think it would be useful to add constants
> `OFFSET_IN_RANGE` and `OFFSET_OUT_OF_RANGE`, then it becomes much clearer in
> source and you can drop the `/* offsetInRange */` comment on the argument.
Hi
On Tue, 10 May 2022 01:23:55 GMT, Xiaohong Gong wrote:
> Checking whether the indexes of masked lanes are inside of the valid memory
> boundary is necessary for masked vector memory access. However, this could be
> saved if the given offset is inside of the vector range that could
On Tue, 7 Jun 2022 06:41:36 GMT, Jatin Bhateja wrote:
>> Yeah, thanks and it's really a good suggestion to limit this benchmark only
>> for the IOOBE cases. I locally modified the tests to make sure only the
>> IOOBE case happens and the results show good as well. But do you think it's
>>
On Thu, 12 May 2022 16:07:54 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
>> Xiaohong Gong has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Rename "use_predicate" to "needs_predicate"
>
> Yes, the tests we
On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 10:31:59 GMT, Xiaohong Gong wrote:
> Currently the vector load with mask when the given index happens out of the
> array boundary is implemented with pure java scalar code to avoid the IOOBE
> (IndexOutOfBoundaryException). This is necessary for architecture
On Thu, 2 Jun 2022 03:24:07 GMT, Xiaohong Gong wrote:
>>> @XiaohongGong Could you please rebase the branch and resolve conflicts?
>>
>> Sure, I'm working on this now. The patch will be updated soon. Thanks.
>
>> > @XiaohongGong Could you please rebase
On Thu, 12 May 2022 16:07:54 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
>> Xiaohong Gong has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Rename "use_predicate" to "needs_predicate"
>
> Yes, the tests we
On Fri, 6 May 2022 14:59:26 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
>> Make sense! Thanks for the explanation!
>
> Doh! of course. This is not the first and will not be the last time i get
> caught out by the 2-slot requirement.
> It may be useful to do this:
>
> Node* mask_arg = is_store ? argument(8) :
On Mon, 9 May 2022 21:55:27 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
>> Xiaohong Gong has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Rename "use_predicate" to "needs_predicate"
>
> I modified the c
On Tue, 10 May 2022 01:23:55 GMT, Xiaohong Gong wrote:
> Checking whether the indexes of masked lanes are inside of the valid memory
> boundary is necessary for masked vector memory access. However, this could be
> saved if the given offset is inside of the vector range that could
On Mon, 9 May 2022 21:55:27 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
> I modified the code of this PR to avoid the conversion of `boolean` to `int`,
> so a constant integer value is passed all the way through, and the masked
> load is made intrinsic from the method at which the constants are passed as
>
Checking whether the indexes of masked lanes are inside of the valid memory
boundary is necessary for masked vector memory access. However, this could be
saved if the given offset is inside of the vector range that could make sure no
IOOBE (IndexOutOfBoundaryException) happens. The masked load
On Thu, 5 May 2022 01:21:40 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
> > Yeah, I agree that it's not good by adding a branch checking for
> > `offsetInRange`. But actually I met the constant issue that passing the
> > values all the way cannot guarantee the argument a constant in compiler at
> > the compile
oreMaskedBenchmark.longStoreArrayMask2025.031 4604.504 ops/ms
> StoreMaskedBenchmark.shortStoreArrayMask 8339.389 17817.128 ops/ms
>
> Similar performance gain can also be observed on ARM SVE system.
Xiaohong Gong has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
merge or a
On Thu, 5 May 2022 02:27:03 GMT, John R Rose wrote:
>> Xiaohong Gong has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains one commit:
>>
>> 8284050: [vectorapi] Optimize masked store for non-predicated archi
On Thu, 28 Apr 2022 00:13:49 GMT, Sandhya Viswanathan
wrote:
>> Xiaohong Gong has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Rename the "usePred" to "offsetInRange"
>
> src/hotspot/sha
Currently the vectorization of masked vector store is implemented by the masked
store instruction only on architectures that support the predicate feature. The
compiler will fall back to the java scalar code for non-predicate supported
architectures like ARM NEON. However, for these systems,
On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 21:34:13 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
>> Xiaohong Gong has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Rename the "usePred" to "offsetInRange"
>
> IIUC when the hardwar
On Thu, 5 May 2022 01:42:48 GMT, Xiaohong Gong wrote:
> > > Yeah, I agree that it's not good by adding a branch checking for
> > > `offsetInRange`. But actually I met the constant issue that passing the
> > > values all the way cannot guarantee the argu
On Thu, 5 May 2022 02:14:08 GMT, Xiaohong Gong wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/opto/vectorIntrinsics.cpp line 1232:
>>
>>> 1230: // out when current case uses the predicate feature.
>>> 1231: if (!supports_predicate) {
>>> 1232: bool use
On Thu, 5 May 2022 02:09:39 GMT, Xiaohong Gong wrote:
>> Currently the vectorization of masked vector store is implemented by the
>> masked store instruction only on architectures that support the predicate
>> feature. The compiler will fall back to the java scalar code for
On Thu, 5 May 2022 02:00:04 GMT, Xiaohong Gong wrote:
> Currently the vectorization of masked vector store is implemented by the
> masked store instruction only on architectures that support the predicate
> feature. The compiler will fall back to the java scalar code for
> n
7075.923 ops/ms
> LoadMaskedIOOBEBenchmark.longLoadArrayMaskIOOBE 119.771 330.587 ops/ms
> LoadMaskedIOOBEBenchmark.shortLoadArrayMaskIOOBE 431.961 939.301 ops/ms
>
> Similar performance gain can also be observed on 512-bit SVE system.
Xiaohong Gong has updated the pull request inc
On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 02:15:26 GMT, Quan Anh Mai wrote:
>> I'm afraid not. "Load + Blend" makes the elements of unmasked lanes to be
>> `0`. Then a full store may change the values in the unmasked memory to be 0,
>> which is different with the mask store API definition.
>
> The blend should be
On Thu, 5 May 2022 02:09:39 GMT, Xiaohong Gong wrote:
>> Currently the vectorization of masked vector store is implemented by the
>> masked store instruction only on architectures that support the predicate
>> feature. The compiler will fall back to the java scalar code for
On Thu, 5 May 2022 19:27:47 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
>> Xiaohong Gong has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Rename "use_predicate" to "needs_predicate"
>
> src/hotspot/sha
On Fri, 6 May 2022 04:22:30 GMT, Sandhya Viswanathan
wrote:
>> I'm afraid it's `argument(8)` for the load operation since the `argument(7)`
>> is the mask input. It seems the argument number is not right begin from the
>> mask input which is expected to be `6`. But the it's not. Actually I
86 matches
Mail list logo
