From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
To: Noah Goldstein <goldstein.w.n@gmail.com>
Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org, hjl.tools@gmail.com,
carlos@systemhalted.org
Subject: Re: x86: Prepare `strrchr-evex` and `strrchr-evex512` for AVX10
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2023 11:18:14 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87fs28gug9.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231004184855.3517478-1-goldstein.w.n@gmail.com> (Noah Goldstein's message of "Wed, 4 Oct 2023 13:48:55 -0500")
* Noah Goldstein:
> This commit refactors `strrchr-evex` and `strrchr-evex512` to use a
> common implementation: `strrchr-evex-base.S`.
>
> The motivation is `strrchr-evex` needed to be refactored to not use
> 64-bit masked registers in preperation for AVX10.
>
> Once vec-width masked register combining was removed, the EVEX and
> EVEX512 implementations can easily be implemented in the same file
> without any major overhead.
>
> The net result is performance improvements (measured on TGL) for both
> `strrchr-evex` and `strrchr-evex512`. Although, note there are some
> regressions in the test suite and it may be many of the cases that
> make the total-geomean of improvement/regression across bench-strrchr
> are cold. The point of the performance measurement is to show there
> are no major regressions, but the primary motivation is preperation
> for AVX10.
>
> Benchmarks where taken on TGL:
> https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/sku/213799/intel-core-i711850h-processor-24m-cache-up-to-4-80-ghz/specifications.html
>
> EVEX geometric_mean(N=5) of all benchmarks New / Original : 0.74
> EVEX512 geometric_mean(N=5) of all benchmarks New / Original: 0.87
>
> Full check passes on x86.
I believe this caused some sort of regression because when we upgraded
glibc in the Fedora rawhide buildroot, a lot of things started failing:
glibc-2.38.9000-13.fc40 broke rawhide buildroot on x86_64
<https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244688>
The list of changes relative to the previous version is rather short:
- stdlib: fix grouping verification with multi-byte thousands separator (bug 30964)
- build-many-glibcs: Check for required system tools
- x86: Prepare `strrchr-evex` and `strrchr-evex512` for AVX10
- aarch64: Optimise vecmath logs
- aarch64: Cosmetic change in SVE exp routines
- aarch64: Optimize SVE cos & cosf
- aarch64: Improve vecmath sin routines
- nss: Get rid of alloca usage in makedb's write_output.
- debug: Add regression tests for BZ 30932
- Fix FORTIFY_SOURCE false positive
- nss: Rearrange and sort Makefile variables
- inet: Rearrange and sort Makefile variables
- Fix off-by-one OOB write in iconv/tst-iconv-mt
And this patch is the most likely one to cause issues. I will try to
revert the patch and see if it fixes the observed issues.
Thanks,
Florian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-18 9:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-21 14:38 Noah Goldstein
2023-09-21 14:39 ` Noah Goldstein
2023-09-21 15:16 ` H.J. Lu
2023-09-21 19:19 ` Noah Goldstein
2023-10-04 18:48 ` Noah Goldstein
2023-10-04 19:00 ` Sunil Pandey
2023-10-18 9:18 ` Florian Weimer [this message]
2023-11-01 21:04 ` Florian Weimer
2023-11-01 21:11 ` Noah Goldstein
2023-11-01 21:22 ` Noah Goldstein
2023-11-01 22:17 ` Noah Goldstein
2023-11-02 6:44 ` Florian Weimer
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=87fs28gug9.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com \
--to=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=carlos@systemhalted.org \
--cc=goldstein.w.n@gmail.com \
--cc=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
/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.
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 read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).