On Wed, 18 Nov 2020 13:46:04 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev <[email protected]> wrote:
>> This is a micro benchmark for various algorithm settings of PKCS keystores.
>> Strong for new algorithms and weak for old ones. Different iteration counts
>> are tried. The result should show that the current setting (strong10000) is
>> more efficient than old setting (weak50000).
>
> test/micro/org/openjdk/bench/java/security/PKCS12KeyStores.java line 65:
>
>> 63: }
>> 64:
>> 65: static {
>
> Move these to
>
> @Setup
> public void setup() throws Exception {
> ...
> }
>
> This would save you a `try-catch` section, and harness would properly fail on
> setup exception.
Newbie on JMH. Is it worth designing the byte[] fields as static? I assume
there will be different objects for different forks but only one for different
threads?
> test/micro/org/openjdk/bench/java/security/PKCS12KeyStores.java line 137:
>
>> 135: "PBEWithSHA1AndDESede", "2048",
>> 136: "HmacPBESHA1", "2048");
>> 137: }
>
> Any reason why these methods are not inlined into `@Benchmark` methods right
> away? E.g. why it is not:
>
> @Benchmark
> public byte[] outweak2048() throws Exception {
> return out("PBEWithSHA1AndRC2_40", "2048",
> "PBEWithSHA1AndDESede", "2048",
> "HmacPBESHA1", "2048");
> }
I want to make the byte[] fields static so the out() and gen***() methods must
be static, and there is a warning on using a static method as a `@Benchmark`
method.
-------------
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/1277
