Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

JDK-8255059: Regressions >5% in all Javadoc benchmarks in 16-b19 #2221

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

@hns
Copy link
Member

@hns hns commented Jan 25, 2021

I have narrowed down the performance regression to the modularity check introduced in JDK-8240169. Since this check is not necessary if we know that the element list's modularity matches that of the library we can omit the modularity check when linking to platform libraries using our own element lists.

Unfortunately, while recent element lists match the modular JDK libraries, the ones for JDK 9 and 10 do not. The patch therefore adds module tags to the lists for these two versions. For JDK 10, this is a relatively simple change because the packages were already ordered by module. For JDK 9 the change unfortunately requires changing the order of packages. I've written a small utility program to convert the list and have double-checked its content matches the old list.

Performance should be very close to where it was before the regression. I haven't run the benchmarks on the final version because I currently have some background tasks running, but I will do so eventually before integration.


Progress

  • Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
  • Commit message must refer to an issue
  • Change must be properly reviewed

Issue

  • JDK-8255059: Regressions >5% in all Javadoc benchmarks in 16-b19

Reviewers

Download

$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/2221/head:pull/2221
$ git checkout pull/2221

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

@bridgekeeper bridgekeeper bot commented Jan 25, 2021

👋 Welcome back hannesw! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the rfr label Jan 25, 2021
@openjdk
Copy link

@openjdk openjdk bot commented Jan 25, 2021

@hns The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:

  • javadoc

When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing list. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the javadoc label Jan 25, 2021
@mlbridge
Copy link

@mlbridge mlbridge bot commented Jan 25, 2021

Webrevs

@hns hns closed this Jan 25, 2021
@hns hns reopened this Jan 25, 2021
@@ -528,7 +528,7 @@ private void readElementList(InputStream input, String path, boolean relative, i
} else {
DocPath pkgPath = DocPath.create(elemname.replace('.', '/'));
// Although being modular, JDKs 9 and 10 do not use module names in javadoc URL paths.
if (moduleName != null && (platformVersion < 9 || platformVersion > 10)) {
if (moduleName != null && platformVersion != 9 && platformVersion != 10) {

This comment has been minimized.

@hns

hns Jan 26, 2021
Author Member

I know first version was fine, blame it on a lack of coffee :)

Copy link
Contributor

@jonathan-gibbons jonathan-gibbons left a comment

OK, I see why the old code might be slow (checking all those package names), so I understand why this is a good fix.

@openjdk
Copy link

@openjdk openjdk bot commented Feb 12, 2021

@hns This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks.

ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details.

After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:

8255059: Regressions >5% in all Javadoc benchmarks in 16-b19

Reviewed-by: jjg

You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed.

At the time when this comment was updated there had been 307 new commits pushed to the master branch:

  • 60a2072: 8260431: com/sun/jdi/JdbOptions.java failed with "RuntimeException: 'prop[boo] = >foo<' missing from stdout/stderr"
  • bf47a47: 8261282: Lazy initialization of built-in ICC_Profile/ColorSpace classes is too lazy
  • f4cfd75: 8261510: Use RFC numbers and protocol titles in sun.security.ssl.SSLExtension comments
  • 75c8489: 8261604: ProblemList jdk/dynalink/TypeConverterFactoryMemoryLeakTest.java
  • 1740de2: 8261297: NMT: Final report should use scale 1
  • c342323: 8261431: SA: Add comments about load address of executable
  • 4a72cea: 8261509: Move per-thread StackWatermark from Thread to JavaThread class
  • eef86a8: 8261029: Code heap page sizes not traced correctly using os::trace_page_sizes
  • 0a89987: 8240281: Remove failing assertion code when selecting first memory state in SuperWord::co_locate_pack
  • 9fed604: 8261300: jpackage: rewrite while(0)/while(false) to proper blocks
  • ... and 297 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/d066f2b06c08d41e47cd7a4b1f047f40df1a5972...master

As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the master branch, type /integrate in a new comment.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the ready label Feb 12, 2021
@hns
Copy link
Member Author

@hns hns commented Feb 12, 2021

/integrate

@openjdk openjdk bot closed this Feb 12, 2021
@openjdk openjdk bot added integrated and removed ready rfr labels Feb 12, 2021
@openjdk
Copy link

@openjdk openjdk bot commented Feb 12, 2021

@hns Since your change was applied there have been 309 commits pushed to the master branch:

  • 6a84ec6: 8260044: Parallel GC: Concurrent allocation after heap expansion may cause unnecessary full gc
  • 92ff891: 8261593: Do not use NULL pointer as write buffer parameter in jfrEmergencyDump.cpp write_repository_files
  • 60a2072: 8260431: com/sun/jdi/JdbOptions.java failed with "RuntimeException: 'prop[boo] = >foo<' missing from stdout/stderr"
  • bf47a47: 8261282: Lazy initialization of built-in ICC_Profile/ColorSpace classes is too lazy
  • f4cfd75: 8261510: Use RFC numbers and protocol titles in sun.security.ssl.SSLExtension comments
  • 75c8489: 8261604: ProblemList jdk/dynalink/TypeConverterFactoryMemoryLeakTest.java
  • 1740de2: 8261297: NMT: Final report should use scale 1
  • c342323: 8261431: SA: Add comments about load address of executable
  • 4a72cea: 8261509: Move per-thread StackWatermark from Thread to JavaThread class
  • eef86a8: 8261029: Code heap page sizes not traced correctly using os::trace_page_sizes
  • ... and 299 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/d066f2b06c08d41e47cd7a4b1f047f40df1a5972...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

Pushed as commit 0779add.

💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
2 participants