Skip to content

8366424: Missing type profiling in generated Record Object methods#135

Open
rm-gh-8 wants to merge 1 commit intoopenjdk:masterfrom
rm-gh-8:JDK-8366424-V25
Open

8366424: Missing type profiling in generated Record Object methods#135
rm-gh-8 wants to merge 1 commit intoopenjdk:masterfrom
rm-gh-8:JDK-8366424-V25

Conversation

@rm-gh-8
Copy link
Contributor

@rm-gh-8 rm-gh-8 commented Jan 7, 2026

Backporting JDK-8366424: Missing type profiling in generated Record Object methods.

This commit addresses a HotSpot profiling issue where shared bytecode causes "profile pollution" - multiple call sites sharing the same method profile, degrading type profiling effectiveness.

This backport has internal demand

Ran benchmark on macos-aarch64:

Benchmark                                  Mode  Cnt     Score    Error   Units
RecordMethodsBenchmark.equalsDistinct     thrpt   15   346.810 ±  4.077  ops/us
RecordMethodsBenchmark.equalsGenerated    thrpt   15   345.344 ±  2.830  ops/us
RecordMethodsBenchmark.equalsPolluted     thrpt   15   146.948 ±  3.605  ops/us
RecordMethodsBenchmark.equalsSpecial      thrpt   15   433.302 ±  6.331  ops/us
RecordMethodsBenchmark.hashCodeDistinct   thrpt   15   869.551 ± 11.816  ops/us
RecordMethodsBenchmark.hashCodeGenerated  thrpt   15   872.454 ± 11.104  ops/us
RecordMethodsBenchmark.hashCodePolluted   thrpt   15   215.734 ±  1.739  ops/us
RecordMethodsBenchmark.hashCodeSpecial    thrpt   15  1025.061 ± 10.919  ops/us

Results attached:

macos-aarch64-benchmark.log

Ran related tests (passed) on linux-x64, linux-aarch64, macos-aarch64 and windows-x64:

(Passed) - make test TEST=test/jdk/java/lang/runtime

Results attached:

windows-x64-specific-test.log
macos-aarch64-specific-test.log
linux-x64-specific-test.log
linux-aarch64-specific-test.log


Progress

  • Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
  • Commit message must refer to an issue
  • JDK-8366424 needs maintainer approval

Issue

  • JDK-8366424: Missing type profiling in generated Record Object methods (Bug - P4 - Requested)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk25u-dev.git pull/135/head:pull/135
$ git checkout pull/135

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/135
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk25u-dev.git pull/135/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 135

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 135

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk25u-dev/pull/135.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Jan 7, 2026

👋 Welcome back rm-gh-8! 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
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jan 7, 2026

❗ This change is not yet ready to be integrated.
See the Progress checklist in the description for automated requirements.

@openjdk openjdk bot changed the title Backport 43e036ba89dc8a09129313705f61354463d2c266 8366424: Missing type profiling in generated Record Object methods Jan 7, 2026
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jan 7, 2026

This backport pull request has now been updated with issue from the original commit.

@openjdk openjdk bot added backport Port of a pull request already in a different code base clean Identical backport; no merge resolution required labels Jan 7, 2026
@rm-gh-8 rm-gh-8 marked this pull request as ready for review January 7, 2026 22:53
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jan 7, 2026

⚠️ @rm-gh-8 This change is now ready for you to apply for maintainer approval. This can be done directly in each associated issue or by using the /approval command.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Jan 7, 2026
@mlbridge
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented Jan 7, 2026

Webrevs

@liach
Copy link
Member

liach commented Jan 8, 2026

Beware this patch is not in a feature release yet, so it might not be sufficiently tested for production impact.

@rm-gh-8
Copy link
Contributor Author

rm-gh-8 commented Jan 8, 2026

/approval request for backport of JDK-8366424: Missing type profiling in generated Record Object methods.

This commit addresses a HotSpot profiling issue where shared bytecode causes "profile pollution" - multiple call sites sharing the same method profile, degrading type profiling effectiveness.

This backport has internal demand

Low risk - Fix addressing a test problem caused by timeout behavior. The main concern is ensuring the new timeout values are appropriate.

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jan 8, 2026

@rm-gh-8
8366424: The approval request has been created successfully.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the approval Requires approval; will be removed when approval is received label Jan 8, 2026
@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Feb 5, 2026

@rm-gh-8 This pull request has been inactive for more than 4 weeks and will be automatically closed if another 4 weeks passes without any activity. To avoid this, simply issue a /touch or /keepalive command to the pull request. Feel free to ask for assistance if you need help with progressing this pull request towards integration!

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

Labels

approval Requires approval; will be removed when approval is received backport Port of a pull request already in a different code base clean Identical backport; no merge resolution required rfr Pull request is ready for review

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants