Re: Popcount optimization using AVX512

Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>

From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>

To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

Cc: "Amonson, Paul D" <paul.d.amonson@intel.com>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>, "Shankaran, Akash" <akash.shankaran@intel.com>, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>, Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres@gmail.com>, "pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>

Date: 2024-03-29T16:41:53Z

Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

Fix __attribute__((target(...))) usage.
- 41b98ddb77bf 18.0 landed
Use __attribute__((target(...))) for AVX-512 support.
- f78667bd910e 18.0 landed
Fix code for probing availability of AVX-512.
- 598e0114a3b1 17.0 landed
Optimize visibilitymap_count() with AVX-512 instructions.
- 41c51f0c68b2 17.0 landed
Optimize pg_popcount() with AVX-512 instructions.
- 792752af4eb5 17.0 landed
Inline pg_popcount() for small buffers.
- deb1486c7d36 17.0 landed
Avoid function call overhead of pg_popcount() in syslogger.c.
- 4133c1f45c54 17.0 landed
Refactor code for setting pg_popcount* function pointers.
- 6687430c98f3 17.0 landed
Inline pg_popcount{32,64} into pg_popcount().
- cc4826dd5e52 17.0 landed
Remove MSVC scripts
- 1301c80b2167 17.0 cited
Use ARMv8 CRC instructions where available.
- f044d71e331d 11.0 cited
Use Intel SSE 4.2 CRC instructions where available.
- 3dc2d62d0486 9.5.0 cited

On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 12:30:14PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> writes:
>>> 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.
> 
> Some quick googling says that (1) XGETBV predates AVX and (2) if you
> are worried about old CPUs, you should check CPUID to verify whether
> XGETBV exists before trying to use it.  I did not look for the
> bit-level details on how to do that.

That extra CPUID check should translate to exactly one additional line of
code, so I think I'm inclined to just add it.

-- 
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com