RE: Popcount optimization using AVX512
Amonson, Paul D <paul.d.amonson@intel.com>
From: "Amonson, Paul D" <paul.d.amonson@intel.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@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: 2024-03-25T15:20:19Z
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
> -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> > Sent: Monday, March 25, 2024 8:12 AM > To: Amonson, Paul D <paul.d.amonson@intel.com> > Cc: David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>; Nathan Bossart > Subject: Re: Popcount optimization using AVX512 >... > Just for a note --- the cfbot will re-test existing patches every so often without > needing a bump. The current cycle period seems to be about two days. > > regards, tom lane Good to know! Maybe this is why I thought it originally passed CI and suddenly this morning there is a failure. I noticed at least 2 other patch runs also failed in the same way. Thanks, Paul