gpt4 book ai didi

java - 具有恒定长度的 System.arraycopy

转载 作者:搜寻专家 更新时间:2023-10-30 19:45:01 25 4
gpt4 key购买 nike

我在玩 JMH (http://openjdk.java.net/projects/code-tools/jmh/),我偶然发现了一个奇怪的结果。

我正在对制作数组浅拷贝的方法进行基准测试,我可以观察到预期结果(遍历数组是一个坏主意,并且 #clone()System#arraycopy()Arrays#copyOf() 之间没有显着差异,性能方面).

除了 System#arraycopy() 在数组长度被硬编码时慢了四分之一...等等,什么?这怎么可能更慢?

有没有人知道可能是什么原因?

结果(吞吐量):

# JMH 1.11 (released 17 days ago)
# VM version: JDK 1.8.0_05, VM 25.5-b02
# VM invoker: /Library/Java/JavaVirtualMachines/jdk1.8.0_05.jdk/Contents/Home/jre/bin/java
# VM options: -Dfile.encoding=UTF-8 -Duser.country=FR -Duser.language=fr -Duser.variant
# Warmup: 20 iterations, 1 s each
# Measurement: 20 iterations, 1 s each
# Timeout: 10 min per iteration
# Threads: 1 thread, will synchronize iterations
# Benchmark mode: Throughput, ops/time

Benchmark Mode Cnt Score Error Units
ArrayCopyBenchmark.ArraysCopyOf thrpt 20 67100500,319 ± 455252,537 ops/s
ArrayCopyBenchmark.ArraysCopyOf_Class thrpt 20 65246374,290 ± 976481,330 ops/s
ArrayCopyBenchmark.ArraysCopyOf_Class_ConstantSize thrpt 20 65068143,162 ± 1597390,531 ops/s
ArrayCopyBenchmark.ArraysCopyOf_ConstantSize thrpt 20 64463603,462 ± 953946,811 ops/s
ArrayCopyBenchmark.Clone thrpt 20 64837239,393 ± 834353,404 ops/s
ArrayCopyBenchmark.Loop thrpt 20 21070422,097 ± 112595,764 ops/s
ArrayCopyBenchmark.Loop_ConstantSize thrpt 20 24458867,274 ± 181486,291 ops/s
ArrayCopyBenchmark.SystemArrayCopy thrpt 20 66688368,490 ± 582416,954 ops/s
ArrayCopyBenchmark.SystemArrayCopy_ConstantSize thrpt 20 48992312,357 ± 298807,039 ops/s

和基准类:

import java.util.Arrays;
import java.util.concurrent.TimeUnit;

import org.openjdk.jmh.annotations.Benchmark;
import org.openjdk.jmh.annotations.BenchmarkMode;
import org.openjdk.jmh.annotations.Mode;
import org.openjdk.jmh.annotations.OutputTimeUnit;
import org.openjdk.jmh.annotations.Scope;
import org.openjdk.jmh.annotations.Setup;
import org.openjdk.jmh.annotations.State;

@State(Scope.Benchmark)
@BenchmarkMode(Mode.Throughput)
@OutputTimeUnit(TimeUnit.SECONDS)
public class ArrayCopyBenchmark {

private static final int LENGTH = 32;

private Object[] array;

@Setup
public void before() {
array = new Object[LENGTH];
for (int i = 0; i < LENGTH; i++) {
array[i] = new Object();
}
}

@Benchmark
public Object[] Clone() {
Object[] src = this.array;
return src.clone();
}

@Benchmark
public Object[] ArraysCopyOf() {
Object[] src = this.array;
return Arrays.copyOf(src, src.length);
}

@Benchmark
public Object[] ArraysCopyOf_ConstantSize() {
Object[] src = this.array;
return Arrays.copyOf(src, LENGTH);
}

@Benchmark
public Object[] ArraysCopyOf_Class() {
Object[] src = this.array;
return Arrays.copyOf(src, src.length, Object[].class);
}

@Benchmark
public Object[] ArraysCopyOf_Class_ConstantSize() {
Object[] src = this.array;
return Arrays.copyOf(src, LENGTH, Object[].class);
}

@Benchmark
public Object[] SystemArrayCopy() {
Object[] src = this.array;
int length = src.length;
Object[] array = new Object[length];
System.arraycopy(src, 0, array, 0, length);
return array;
}

@Benchmark
public Object[] SystemArrayCopy_ConstantSize() {
Object[] src = this.array;
Object[] array = new Object[LENGTH];
System.arraycopy(src, 0, array, 0, LENGTH);
return array;
}

@Benchmark
public Object[] Loop() {
Object[] src = this.array;
int length = src.length;
Object[] array = new Object[length];
for (int i = 0; i < length; i++) {
array[i] = src[i];
}
return array;
}

@Benchmark
public Object[] Loop_ConstantSize() {
Object[] src = this.array;
Object[] array = new Object[LENGTH];
for (int i = 0; i < LENGTH; i++) {
array[i] = src[i];
}
return array;
}
}

最佳答案

像往常一样,通过研究生成的代码可以快速回答此类问题。 JMH 在 Linux 上为您提供 -prof perfasm,在 Windows 上为您提供 -prof xperfasm。如果您在 JDK 8u40 上运行基准测试,那么您将看到(注意我使用 -bm avgt -tu ns 使分数更容易理解):

Benchmark                         Mode  Cnt   Score   Error  Units
ACB.SystemArrayCopy avgt 25 13.294 ± 0.052 ns/op
ACB.SystemArrayCopy_ConstantSize avgt 25 16.413 ± 0.080 ns/op

为什么这些基准测试的表现不同?让我们先做-prof perfnorm来剖析(我去掉了无关紧要的行):

Benchmark                                     Mode  Cnt    Score    Error  Units
ACB.SAC avgt 25 13.466 ± 0.070 ns/op
ACB.SAC:·CPI avgt 5 0.602 ± 0.025 #/op
ACB.SAC:·L1-dcache-load-misses avgt 5 2.346 ± 0.239 #/op
ACB.SAC:·L1-dcache-loads avgt 5 24.756 ± 1.438 #/op
ACB.SAC:·L1-dcache-store-misses avgt 5 2.404 ± 0.129 #/op
ACB.SAC:·L1-dcache-stores avgt 5 14.929 ± 0.230 #/op
ACB.SAC:·LLC-loads avgt 5 2.151 ± 0.217 #/op
ACB.SAC:·branches avgt 5 17.795 ± 1.003 #/op
ACB.SAC:·cycles avgt 5 56.677 ± 3.187 #/op
ACB.SAC:·instructions avgt 5 94.145 ± 6.442 #/op

ACB.SAC_ConstantSize avgt 25 16.447 ± 0.084 ns/op
ACB.SAC_ConstantSize:·CPI avgt 5 0.637 ± 0.016 #/op
ACB.SAC_ConstantSize:·L1-dcache-load-misses avgt 5 2.357 ± 0.206 #/op
ACB.SAC_ConstantSize:·L1-dcache-loads avgt 5 25.611 ± 1.482 #/op
ACB.SAC_ConstantSize:·L1-dcache-store-misses avgt 5 2.368 ± 0.123 #/op
ACB.SAC_ConstantSize:·L1-dcache-stores avgt 5 25.593 ± 1.610 #/op
ACB.SAC_ConstantSize:·LLC-loads avgt 5 1.050 ± 0.038 #/op
ACB.SAC_ConstantSize:·branches avgt 5 17.853 ± 0.697 #/op
ACB.SAC_ConstantSize:·cycles avgt 5 66.680 ± 2.049 #/op
ACB.SAC_ConstantSize:·instructions avgt 5 104.759 ± 4.831 #/op

所以,ConstantSize 以某种方式做了更多的 L1-dcache-stores,但少了一个 LLC-load。嗯,这就是我们正在寻找的,在常量情况下有更多的商店。 -prof perfasm 方便地突出显示装配中的热部件:

默认:

  4.32%    6.36%   0x00007f7714bda2dc: movq   $0x1,(%rax)            ; alloc
0.09% 0.04% 0x00007f7714bda2e3: prefetchnta 0x100(%r9)
2.95% 1.48% 0x00007f7714bda2eb: movl $0xf80022a9,0x8(%rax)
0.38% 0.18% 0x00007f7714bda2f2: mov %r11d,0xc(%rax)
1.56% 3.02% 0x00007f7714bda2f6: prefetchnta 0x140(%r9)
4.73% 2.71% 0x00007f7714bda2fe: prefetchnta 0x180(%r9)

ConstantSize:

  0.58%    1.22%   0x00007facf921132b: movq   $0x1,(%r14)            ; alloc
0.84% 0.72% 0x00007facf9211332: prefetchnta 0xc0(%r10)
0.11% 0.13% 0x00007facf921133a: movl $0xf80022a9,0x8(%r14)
0.21% 0.68% 0x00007facf9211342: prefetchnta 0x100(%r10)
0.50% 0.87% 0x00007facf921134a: movl $0x20,0xc(%r14)
0.53% 0.82% 0x00007facf9211352: mov $0x10,%ecx
0.04% 0.14% 0x00007facf9211357: xor %rax,%rax
0.34% 0.76% 0x00007facf921135a: shl $0x3,%rcx
0.50% 1.17% 0x00007facf921135e: rex.W rep stos %al,%es:(%rdi) ; zeroing
29.49% 52.09% 0x00007facf9211361: prefetchnta 0x140(%r10)
1.03% 0.53% 0x00007facf9211369: prefetchnta 0x180(%r10)

所以那个讨厌的 rex.W rep stos %al,%es:(%rdi) 消耗了大量时间。这会将新分配的数组归零。在 ConstantSize 测试中,JVM 无法关联您正在覆盖整个目标数组,因此它必须在进入实际数组副本之前将其预置零。

如果您查看 JDK 9b82(最新可用)上生成的代码,那么您会看到它在非零副本中折叠了两种模式,正如您在 -prof perfasm 中看到的那样,并且也可以用-prof perfnorm确认:

Benchmark                                     Mode  Cnt    Score    Error  Units
ACB.SAC avgt 50 14.156 ± 0.492 ns/op
ACB.SAC:·CPI avgt 5 0.612 ± 0.144 #/op
ACB.SAC:·L1-dcache-load-misses avgt 5 2.363 ± 0.341 #/op
ACB.SAC:·L1-dcache-loads avgt 5 28.350 ± 2.181 #/op
ACB.SAC:·L1-dcache-store-misses avgt 5 2.287 ± 0.607 #/op
ACB.SAC:·L1-dcache-stores avgt 5 16.922 ± 3.402 #/op
ACB.SAC:·branches avgt 5 21.242 ± 5.914 #/op
ACB.SAC:·cycles avgt 5 67.168 ± 20.950 #/op
ACB.SAC:·instructions avgt 5 109.931 ± 35.905 #/op

ACB.SAC_ConstantSize avgt 50 13.763 ± 0.067 ns/op
ACB.SAC_ConstantSize:·CPI avgt 5 0.625 ± 0.024 #/op
ACB.SAC_ConstantSize:·L1-dcache-load-misses avgt 5 2.376 ± 0.214 #/op
ACB.SAC_ConstantSize:·L1-dcache-loads avgt 5 28.285 ± 2.127 #/op
ACB.SAC_ConstantSize:·L1-dcache-store-misses avgt 5 2.335 ± 0.223 #/op
ACB.SAC_ConstantSize:·L1-dcache-stores avgt 5 16.926 ± 1.467 #/op
ACB.SAC_ConstantSize:·branches avgt 5 19.469 ± 0.869 #/op
ACB.SAC_ConstantSize:·cycles avgt 5 62.395 ± 3.898 #/op
ACB.SAC_ConstantSize:·instructions avgt 5 99.891 ± 5.435 #/op

当然,所有这些用于数组复制的纳米基准都容易受到向量化复制 stub 中奇怪的对齐引起的性能差异的影响,但这是另一个(恐怖的)故事,我没有勇气讲。

关于java - 具有恒定长度的 System.arraycopy,我们在Stack Overflow上找到一个类似的问题: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/32834869/

25 4 0
Copyright 2021 - 2024 cfsdn All Rights Reserved 蜀ICP备2022000587号
广告合作:1813099741@qq.com 6ren.com