For simplicity imagine this scenario, we have a 2-bit computer, which has a pair of 2 bit registers called r1 and r2 and only works with immediate addressing.
Lets say the bit sequence 00 means add to our cpu. Also 01 means move data to r1 and 10 means move data to r2.
So there is an Assembly Language for this computer and a Assembler, where a sample code would be written like
mov r1,1
mov r2,2
add r1,r2
Simply, when I assemble this code to native language and the file will be something like:
0101 1010 0001
the 12 bits above is the native code for:
Put decimal 1 to R1, Put decimal 2 to R2, Add the data and store in R1.
So this is basically how a compiled code works, right?
Lets say someone implements a JVM for this architecture. In Java I will be writing code like:
int x = 1 + 2;
How exactly will JVM interpret this code? I mean eventually the same bit pattern must be passed to the cpu, isn't it? All cpu's have a number of instructions that it can understand and execute, and they are after all just some bits. Lets say the compiled Java byte-code looks something like this:
1111 1100 1001
or whatever.. Does it mean that the interpreting changes this code to 0101 1010 0001 when executing? If it is, it is already in the Native Code, so why is it said that JIT only kicks in after a number of times? If it does not convert it exactly to 0101 1010 0001, then what does it do? How does it make the cpu do the addition?
Maybe there are some mistakes in my assumptions.
I know interpreting is slow, compiled code is faster but not portable, and a virtual machine "interprets" a code, but how? I am looking for "how exactly/technically interpreting" is done. Any pointers (such as books or web pages) are welcome instead of answers as well.
The CPU architecture you describe is unfortunately too restricted to make this really clear with all the intermediate steps. Instead, I will write pseudo-C and pseudo-x86-assembler, hopefully in a way that is clear without being terribly familiar with C or x86.
The compiled JVM bytecode might look something like this:
ldc 0 # push first first constant (== 1)
ldc 1 # push the second constant (== 2)
iadd # pop two integers and push their sum
istore_0 # pop result and store in local variable
The interpreter has (a binary encoding of) these instructions in an array, and an index referring to the current instruction. It also has an array of constants, and a memory region used as stack and one for local variables. Then the interpreter loop looks like this:
while (true) {
switch(instructions[pc]) {
case LDC:
sp += 1; // make space for constant
stack[sp] = constants[instructions[pc+1]];
pc += 2; // two-byte instruction
case IADD:
stack[sp-1] += stack[sp]; // add to first operand
sp -= 1; // pop other operand
pc += 1; // one-byte instruction
case ISTORE_0:
locals[0] = stack[sp];
sp -= 1; // pop
pc += 1; // one-byte instruction
// ... other cases ...
}
}
This C code is compiled into machine code and run. As you can see, it's highly dynamic: It inspects each bytecode instruction each time that instruction is executed, and all values goes through the stack (i.e. RAM).
While the actual addition itself probably happens in a register, the code surrounding the addition is rather different from what a Java-to-machine code compiler would emit. Here's an excerpt from what a C compiler might turn the above into (pseudo-x86):
.ldc:
incl %esi # increment the variable pc, first half of pc += 2;
movb %ecx, program(%esi) # load byte after instruction
movl %eax, constants(,%ebx,4) # load constant from pool
incl %edi # increment sp
movl %eax, stack(,%edi,4) # write constant onto stack
incl %esi # other half of pc += 2
jmp .EndOfSwitch
.addi
movl %eax, stack(,%edi,4) # load first operand
decl %edi # sp -= 1;
addl stack(,%edi,4), %eax # add
incl %esi # pc += 1;
jmp .EndOfSwitch
You can see that the operands for the addition come from memory instead of being hardcoded, even though for the purposes of the Java program they are constant. That's because for the interpreter, they are not constant. The interpreter is compiled once and then must be able to execute all sorts of programs, without generating specialized code.
The purpose of the JIT compiler is to do just that: Generate specialized code. A JIT can analyze the ways the stack is used to transfer data, the actual values of various constants in the program, and the sequence of calculations performed, to generate code that more efficiently does the same thing. In our example program, it would allocate the local variable 0 to a register, replace the access to the constant table with moving constants into registers (movl %eax, $1), and redirect the stack accesses to the right machine registers. Ignoring a few more optimizations (copy propagation, constant folding and dead code elimination) that would normally be done, it might end up with code like this:
movl %ebx, $1 # ldc 0
movl %ecx, $2 # ldc 1
movl %eax, %ebx # (1/2) addi
addl %eax, %ecx # (2/2) addi
# no istore_0, local variable 0 == %eax, so we're done