Inlining methods with large switch statements

Roland Westrelin roland.westrelin at
Fri Jun 5 16:03:08 UTC 2015

> By "handled better" I mean for the JIT to not get scared about the bytecode size since machine code is rather compact and quick to execute (especially if the indirect jump via the jump table is predicted well).  This is somewhat analogous to the JIT being spooked by methods > MaxInlineSize where the actual bytecode size isn't representative of the real cost (e.g. dead code, asserts, etc), but for FreqInlineSize.

John suggested a way to improve our heuristics:


More information about the hotspot-compiler-dev mailing list