Re: Using POPCNT and other advanced bit manipulation instructions

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Andres Freund
Тема Re: Using POPCNT and other advanced bit manipulation instructions
Дата
Msg-id 20190214185905.kwvrjy6qu52xdxyh@alap3.anarazel.de
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Using POPCNT and other advanced bit manipulation instructions  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Ответы Re: Using POPCNT and other advanced bit manipulation instructions  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Hi,

On 2019-02-14 15:47:13 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2019-Feb-14, Tom Lane wrote:
> 
> > Some further thoughts here ...
> > 
> > Does the "lzcnt" runtime probe actually do anything useful?
> > On the x86_64 compilers I tried (gcc 8.2.1 and 4.4.7), __builtin_clz
> > and __builtin_ctz compile to sequences involving bsrq and bsfq
> > regardless of -mpopcnt.  It's fairly hard to see how lzcnt would
> > buy anything over those sequences even if there were zero overhead
> > involved in using it.
> 
> Hah, I just realized you have to add -mlzcnt in order for these builtins
> to use the lzcnt instructions.  It goes from something like
> 
>     bsrq    %rax, %rax
>     xorq    $63, %rax

I'm confused how this is a general count leading zero operation? Did you
use constants or something that allowed ot infer a range in the test? If
so the compiler probably did some optimizations allowing it to do the
above.


> to
>     lzcntq    %rax, %rax
> 
> Significant?

If I understand Agner's tables correctly, then no, this isn't faster
than the two instructions above.


Greetings,

Andres Freund


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Using POPCNT and other advanced bit manipulation instructions
Следующее
От: Andres Freund
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Proposal for Signal Detection Refactoring