8296591: Signature benchmark

[XueleiFan]

Hi,

May I have the micro-benchmark code reviewed for EC signature algorithms? The benchmarking now is focused on EC algorithms, more algorithms (e.g., RSA/PSS based) may be added later if needed.

Thanks,
Xuelei

---

Progress

• Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Reviewer)
• Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
• Commit message must refer to an issue

Issue

• JDK-8296591: Signature benchmark

Reviewers

• Weijun Wang (@wangweij - Reviewer) ⚠️ Review applies to 003d6f7f

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk pull/11043/head:pull/11043
$ git checkout pull/11043

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/11043
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk pull/11043/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 11043

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 11043

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/11043.diff

[bridgekeeper]

👋 Welcome back xuelei! 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]

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

• security

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.

[mlbridge]

Webrevs

• 01: Full - Incremental (fccfba96)
• 00: Full (003d6f7f)

[wangweij]

One small comment.

[wangweij]

We usually write "SHA256withECDSA".

[XueleiFan]

Yes, it makes sense to me. Thanks!

[openjdk]

@XueleiFan 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:

8296591: Signature benchmark

Reviewed-by: weijun

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 12 new commits pushed to the master branch:

• 0ee25de: 8296504: Memory leak in G1PLABAllocator::PLABData
• dd5d4df: 8295658: G1: Refactor G1SegmentedArray to indicate that it is an allocator
• cf65605: 8296445: C++ syntax error in jdwpTransport.h
• 1169dc0: 8296447: RISC-V: Make the operands order of vrsub_vx/vrsub_vi consistent with RVV 1.0 spec
• 4c80dff: 8296435: RISC-V: Small refactoring for increment/decrement
• 47d2c7b: 8295376: Improve debug agent virtual thread performance when no debugger is attached
• 76790ad: 8295673: Deprecate and disable legacy parallel class loading workaround for non-parallel-capable class loaders
• b6738c1: 8295663: Rephrase introduction to testing.md
• 7e85b41: 8296154: [macos] Change "/Applications" to "Applications" in DMG image
• 60db5f2: 8294020: improve errors for record declarations
• ... and 2 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/b6ea69c06aca7f013e26596cebd039960c5b4d34...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.

[XueleiFan]

/integrate

[openjdk]

Going to push as commit a5d838c.
Since your change was applied there have been 23 commits pushed to the master branch:

• fa8a866: 8296675: Exclude linux-aarch64 in NSS tests
• d4376f8: 8296406: ChainingConstructors jtreg test reduce code duplication
• 4a0093c: 8294362: UL: Replace the internal usage of manual buffers with stringStream in LogSelection
• fef68bb: 8296515: RISC-V: Small refactoring for MaxReductionV/MinReductionV/AddReductionV node implementation
• 82cbfb5: 8296140: Drop unused field java.util.Calendar.DATE_MASK
• fd83764: 8296239: ISO 4217 Amendment 174 Update
• d9b25e8: 8296426: x86: Narrow UseAVX and UseSSE flags
• 8146e1a: 8296347: Memory leak from ClassPathDirEntry::_dir
• 671f84b: 8296143: CertAttrSet's set/get mechanism is not type-safe
• d04d656: 8296433: Encountered null CLD while loading shared lambda proxy class
• ... and 13 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/b6ea69c06aca7f013e26596cebd039960c5b4d34...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

[openjdk]

@XueleiFan Pushed as commit a5d838c.

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

[seanjmullan]

Since this test is named "Signatures", I have filed a follow-on issue to enhance this benchmark to support non-EC signatures: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8296818. I would like to have that in the system, so that we don't forget about it.

[XueleiFan]

Since this test is named "Signatures", I have filed a follow-on issue to enhance this benchmark to support non-EC signatures: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8296818. I would like to have that in the system, so that we don't forget about it.

Thanks!

[ascarpino]

Unfortunately I didn't catch this until it was too late. There is an existing signature test, javax.crypto.[small | full].SignatureBench, which supported secp256, Ed25519 & Ed448, as well as RSA and DSA

[XueleiFan]

Unfortunately I didn't catch this until it was too late. There is an existing signature test, javax.crypto.[small | full].SignatureBench, which supported secp256, Ed25519 & Ed448, as well as RSA and DSA

Thanks for the information. I will see if I could merge them into one. Thanks!

[XueleiFan]

Unfortunately I didn't catch this until it was too late. There is an existing signature test, javax.crypto.[small | full].SignatureBench, which supported secp256, Ed25519 & Ed448, as well as RSA and DSA

Thanks for the information. I will see if I could merge them into one. Thanks!

The javax.crypto.[small | full].SignatureBench measure the multiple signature operations (create object, initialization, sign, etc). The new only measure the sign operation. I would like to have both.