public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Nathan Bossart <[email protected]>
To: Amonson, Paul D <[email protected]>
Cc: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
Cc: David Rowley <[email protected]>
Cc: Andres Freund <[email protected]>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]>
Cc: Shankaran, Akash <[email protected]>
Cc: Noah Misch <[email protected]>
Cc: Matthias van de Meent <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Popcount optimization using AVX512
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2024 11:16:42 -0500
Message-ID: <20240329161642.GA1106154@nathanxps13> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BL1PR11MB5304D039E04286E9DF048473DC3A2@BL1PR11MB5304.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
References: <[email protected]>
<BL1PR11MB53043014C10F2D30B4231F9ADC362@BL1PR11MB5304.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
<BL1PR11MB53049F1796E834DBE0E05864DC362@BL1PR11MB5304.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
<20240325200551.GB2924132@nathanxps13>
<20240327220010.GA231058@nathanxps13>
<BL1PR11MB53047289F146DB43C9B2FC71DC342@BL1PR11MB5304.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
<20240328213854.GA916732@nathanxps13>
<BL1PR11MB5304E51336123CE6F041A920DC3B2@BL1PR11MB5304.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
<20240329153515.GA1046039@nathanxps13>
<BL1PR11MB5304D039E04286E9DF048473DC3A2@BL1PR11MB5304.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 04:06:17PM +0000, Amonson, Paul D wrote:
>> Yeah, I understand that much, but I want to know how portable the XGETBV
>> instruction is. Unless I can assume that all x86_64 systems and compilers
>> support that instruction, we might need an additional configure check and/or
>> CPUID check. It looks like MSVC has had support for the _xgetbv intrinsic for
>> quite a while, but I'm still researching the other cases.
>
> I see google web references to the xgetbv instruction as far back as 2009
> for Intel 64 bit HW and 2010 for AMD 64bit HW, maybe you could test for
> _xgetbv() MSVC built-in. How far back do you need to go?
Hm. It seems unlikely that a compiler would understand AVX512 intrinsics
and not XGETBV then. I guess the other question is whether CPUID
indicating AVX512 is enabled implies the availability of XGETBV on the CPU.
If that's not safe, we might need to add another CPUID test.
It would probably be easy enough to add a couple of tests for this, but if
we don't have reason to believe there's any practical case to do so, I
don't know why we would. I'm curious what others think about this.
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
view thread (22+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Popcount optimization using AVX512
In-Reply-To: <20240329161642.GA1106154@nathanxps13>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox