Re: very slow jni code callbacks
Andrew Haley <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.gcc.java.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Herman ten Brugge wrote: > I have a problem with jni code callbacks. > I have attached some code that shows the problem. > The result of this code is: > > # results on fedora 11 > # gcc/gcj 4.4.1 > # kernel 2.6.30.5-43.fc11.x86_64 > # openjdk fedora-29.b16.fc11-x86_64 > # > # open jdk gcj > # no_jni 1.48 7.46 ( 5 times slower) > # jni 66.70 17140.00 (257 times slower) > > So when not using jni in this case gcj is 5 times slower. > I suspect the jit compiler does a good for this small sample. > > The code with jni calls is however 257 timer slower. I really > did not expect that. I also tried other java vm and they all > have much better performance. So I expect a problem in the > gcj library. > > When I use oprofile I see at lot of calls to execute_cfa_program > and _Unwind_IteratePhdrCallback. I think this is a bug. I've had a look at the code, and it's in jni.cc: _Jv_JNI_CallAnyVoidMethodV This calls _Jv_GetTypesFromSignature, which in turn iterates though all the class loaders looking up the types of all the arguments. But as far as I can see this is a pointless waste of time: the only use of the type of each argument is to determine whether it's a primitive type or not, and we could certainly have done that when we created the jmethodID. There is a field in the method struct called ffi_arg_types, but I think it isn't used when calling C to Java via JNI. Note that JNI calls to Java code will always be somewhat slower than CNI since it goes though a libffi call, but this seems to me to be crazy extreme. I'm Cc:ing this to Tom Tromey, who wrote this code originally. Andrew.