[PATCH] x86_64: Add sinh with FMA
Florian Weimer
fw@deneb.enyo.de
Sun Aug 20 14:28:31 GMT 2023
* H. J. Lu via Libc-alpha:
> On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 12:15 PM Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> * H. J. Lu via Libc-alpha:
>> > There is only one FMA insn in __ieee754_sinh_fma:
>> >
>> > 114: c4 e2 e9 9b 05 00 00 00 00 vfmsub132sd 0x0(%rip),%xmm2,%xmm0
>> >
>> > Since it calls __ieee754_exp and __expm1, with
>> >
>> > commit 1b214630ce6f7e0099b8b6f87246246739b079cf (master)
>> > Author: H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
>> > Date: Fri Aug 11 08:04:08 2023 -0700
>> >
>> > x86_64: Add expm1 with FMA
>> >
>> > On Skylake, it improves expm1 bench performance by:
>> >
>> > Before After Improvement
>> > max 70.204 68.054 3%
>> > min 20.709 16.2 22%
>> > mean 22.1221 16.7367 24%
>> >
>> > There is very little improvement with a single FMA insn.
>>
>> If you specialize the implementation for FMA, could you avoid the
>> indirect call to __ieee754_exp and __expm1?
>>
>
> That is true. Performance differences are
>
> 1. Non-FMA
>
> "sinh": {
> "": {
> "duration": 1.60856e+09,
> "iterations": 1.248e+08,
> "max": 173.747,
> "min": 10.706,
> "mean": 12.8891
> }
> }%
>
> 2. FMA
>
> "sinh": {
> "": {
> "duration": 1.61017e+09,
> "iterations": 1.275e+08,
> "max": 100.218,
> "min": 9.678,
> "mean": 12.6288
> }
> }%
>
> FMA is a little faster. Should I repost it with updated performance
> numbers?
So the baseline is the before column from the original patch?
> On Skylake, it improves sinh bench performance by:
>
> Before After Improvement
> max 64.06 60.416 7%
> min 10.874 9.674 11%
> mean 14.0546 12.2018 13%
So we go from 14.0546 to 12.6288 for the mean case?
More information about the Libc-alpha
mailing list