From: Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>
To: musl@lists.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64/memset: avoid multiply insn if possible
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 02:24:36 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150213072436.GD23507@brightrain.aerifal.cx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAK1hOcOvpmNVO=HPy40N2StZHDt0LNaKxw5_ZjJSZ+_47Av-eg@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 09:36:26PM +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 8:26 PM, Denys Vlasenko
> <vda.linux@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >> I'd actually like to extend the "short" range up to at least 32 bytes
> >> using two 8-byte writes for the middle, unless the savings from using
> >> 32-bit imul instead of 64-bit are sufficient to justify 4 4-byte
> >> writes for the middle. On the cpu I tested on, the difference is 11
> >> cycles vs 32 cycles for non-rep path versus rep path at size 32.
> >
> > The short path causes mixed feelings in me.
> >
> > On one hand, it's elegant in a contrived way.
> >
> > On the other hand, multiple
> > overlaying stores must be causing hell in store unit.
> > I'm thinking, maybe there's a faster way to do that.
In practice it performs quite well. x86's are good at this. The
generic C code in memset.c does not do any overlapping writes of
different sizes for the short buffer code path -- all writes there are
single-byte, and multiple-write only happens for some of the inner
bytes depending on the value of n.
> For example, like in the attached implementation.
>
> This one will not perform eight stores to memory
> to fill 15 byte area... only two.
I could try comparing its performance, but I expect branches to cost a
lot more than redundant stores to cached memory. My approach in the C
code seems to be the absolute minimum possible number of branches for
short memsets, and it pays off -- it's even faster than the current
asm for these small sizes.
Rich
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-13 7:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-12 17:17 Denys Vlasenko
2015-02-12 17:17 ` [PATCH 2/2] x86_64/memset: align destination to 8 byte boundary Denys Vlasenko
2015-02-12 17:27 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86_64/memset: avoid multiply insn if possible Rich Felker
2015-02-12 19:26 ` Denys Vlasenko
2015-02-12 20:36 ` Denys Vlasenko
2015-02-13 7:24 ` Rich Felker [this message]
2015-02-13 16:38 ` Denys Vlasenko
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150213072436.GD23507@brightrain.aerifal.cx \
--to=dalias@libc.org \
--cc=musl@lists.openwall.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.vuxu.org/mirror/musl/
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).