Inlining methods with large switch statements
vitalyd at gmail.com
Fri Jun 5 16:04:28 UTC 2015
Right, I didn't see FreqInlineSize on there, and the large jump table
scenario seemed like one worth calling out as well?
On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Roland Westrelin <
roland.westrelin at oracle.com> wrote:
> > 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:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the hotspot-compiler-dev