Missing evaluation on bugs 6914095, 6914113, 6933327, 6935994
Ulf.Zibis at gmx.de
Thu Oct 13 14:01:20 PDT 2011
Am 11.10.2011 18:30, schrieb Vitaly Davidovich:
> On your last one, have you checked to see if it makes a difference? I believe using partial
> registers requires a prefix on the op, making the instruction larger. Also there are some partial
> register stalls that can be triggered.
How should I check this?
I can't force Hotspot to compile like this to compare the effect.
> On Oct 11, 2011 12:00 PM, "Ulf Zibis" <Ulf.Zibis at gmx.de <mailto:Ulf.Zibis at gmx.de>> wrote:
> some time ago I have submitted these bugs:
> 6914095 <http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6914095> - HotSpot should reuse
> invariant loop parameter
> 6914113 <http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6914113> - Copy int to byte in 1
> 6933327 <http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6933327> - Use shifted addressing
> modes instead of shift instuctions
> 6935994 <http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6935994> - Use as less bits as
> I do not see, why they have been closed as "Will Not Fix".
> Can someone add content to the 'evaluation' section, or at least explain reasons here?
> Much thanks,
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the hotspot-compiler-dev