On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 16:44:03 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
> The goal of this PR is to address the follow-up comments to the SIMD
> accelerated sort PR (#14227) which implemented AVX512 intrinsics for
> Arrays.sort() methods.
> The proposed changes are:
>
> 1) Restric
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 16:44:03 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
> The goal of this PR is to address the follow-up comments to the SIMD
> accelerated sort PR (#14227) which implemented AVX512 intrinsics for
> Arrays.sort() methods.
> The proposed changes are:
>
> 1) Restric
On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 04:41:37 GMT, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
> My tier1-3,xcomp testing for v04 passed. I am integrating these changes. Lets
> continue discussion about changes for AMD in
> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8317976.
Thank you, Vladimir!
-
PR Comment:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 04:41:37 GMT, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
> My tier1-3,xcomp testing for v04 passed. I am integrating these changes. Lets
> continue discussion about changes for AMD in
> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8317976.
Thank you, Vladimir!
-
PR Comment:
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 20:48:06 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>> Srinivas Vamsi Parasa has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Add @ForceInline annotation to insertion and mixedInsertion sort
>
> make/modu
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 20:48:06 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>> Srinivas Vamsi Parasa has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Add @ForceInline annotation to insertion and mixedInsertion sort
>
> make/modu
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 20:31:05 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> Hi @vamsi-parasa,
>>
>> Both methods mixedInsertionSort and insertionSort are covered by intrinsics.
>> But insertionSort is run on leftmnost (one) part only and on small ( <
>> MAX_INSERTION
show_bug.cgi?id=105593
> 3) Minor changes in Javadoc strings
Srinivas Vamsi Parasa has updated the pull request incrementally with one
additional commit since the last revision:
Revert @ForceInline annotations for small array sort methods
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.open
show_bug.cgi?id=105593
> 3) Minor changes in Javadoc strings
Srinivas Vamsi Parasa has updated the pull request incrementally with one
additional commit since the last revision:
Revert @ForceInline annotations for small array sort methods
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.open
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 20:31:05 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> Hi @vamsi-parasa,
>>
>> Both methods mixedInsertionSort and insertionSort are covered by intrinsics.
>> But insertionSort is run on leftmnost (one) part only and on small ( <
>> MAX_INSERTION
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 07:10:57 GMT, iaroslavski wrote:
> To have clear picture could you please run benchmarking to compare both
> cases: current implementation and implementation with Java insertionSort only?
>
> see changes `sort(int.class, a, Unsafe.ARRAY_INT_BASE_OFFSET, low, high,
>
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 07:10:57 GMT, iaroslavski wrote:
> To have clear picture could you please run benchmarking to compare both
> cases: current implementation and implementation with Java insertionSort only?
>
> see changes `sort(int.class, a, Unsafe.ARRAY_INT_BASE_OFFSET, low, high,
>
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 17:28:12 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> The goal of this PR is to address the follow-up comments to the SIMD
>> accelerated sort PR (#14227) which implemented AVX512 intrinsics for
>> Arrays.sort() methods.
>> The proposed changes ar
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 17:28:12 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> The goal of this PR is to address the follow-up comments to the SIMD
>> accelerated sort PR (#14227) which implemented AVX512 intrinsics for
>> Arrays.sort() methods.
>> The proposed changes ar
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 06:59:47 GMT, iaroslavski wrote:
> Also @forceinline in these changes only works for case when new intrinsics
> are not used. I would suggest to adapt/update JMH benchmark to cover all
> cases and see effect @forceinline without intrinsics. That will tell us which
>
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 06:59:47 GMT, iaroslavski wrote:
> Also @forceinline in these changes only works for case when new intrinsics
> are not used. I would suggest to adapt/update JMH benchmark to cover all
> cases and see effect @forceinline without intrinsics. That will tell us which
>
show_bug.cgi?id=105593
> 3) Minor changes in Javadoc strings
Srinivas Vamsi Parasa has updated the pull request incrementally with one
additional commit since the last revision:
Add @ForceInline annotation to insertion and mixedInsertion sort
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.open
show_bug.cgi?id=105593
> 3) Minor changes in Javadoc strings
Srinivas Vamsi Parasa has updated the pull request incrementally with one
additional commit since the last revision:
Add @ForceInline annotation to insertion and mixedInsertion sort
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.open
show_bug.cgi?id=105593
> 3) Minor changes in Javadoc strings
Srinivas Vamsi Parasa has updated the pull request incrementally with one
additional commit since the last revision:
fix whitespace in build script
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16124/files
- n
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 19:48:50 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> In #14227, you inadvertently added an extra space at line 230 in
> make/modules/java.base/Lib.gmk
Hi Magnus (@magicus), please see the extra space fixed in the latest commit.
Thanks,
Vamsi
-
PR Comment:
show_bug.cgi?id=105593
> 3) Minor changes in Javadoc strings
Srinivas Vamsi Parasa has updated the pull request incrementally with one
additional commit since the last revision:
pragma workround for GCC12 bug
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16124/files
- n
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 18:01:59 GMT, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
>> Srinivas Vamsi Parasa has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> pragma workround for GCC12 bug
>
> What is change for "Addressing the b
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 17:55:43 GMT, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
>> Srinivas Vamsi Parasa has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> pragma workround for GCC12 bug
>
> src/hotspot/cpu/x86/stubGenerator_x8
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 18:01:59 GMT, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
> What is change for "Addressing the build failure due to a bug in GCC 12"?
Hello Vladimir,
The change for addressing the build failure will be pushed shortly.
Thanks,
Vamsi
-
PR Comment:
The goal of this PR is to restrict the availability of AVX512 accelerated
Arrays.sort() methods to only Intel CPUs as a performance regression (due to
hardware issues) was reported for AMD Zen4 CPUs in the comments section of
#14227.
-
Commit messages:
- 8317763:Restrict AVX512
On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 18:15:12 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
> > _Mailing list message from [Florian Weimer](mailto:f...@deneb.enyo.de) on
> > [hotspot-runtime-dev](mailto:hotspot-runtime-...@mail.openjdk.org):_
> > I believe this has introduced a build failure with GCC 12.2 on Debian 12.1:
>
> I
On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 18:15:12 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
> > _Mailing list message from [Florian Weimer](mailto:f...@deneb.enyo.de) on
> > [hotspot-runtime-dev](mailto:hotspot-runtime-...@mail.openjdk.org):_
> > I believe this has introduced a build failure with GCC 12.2 on Debian 12.1:
>
> I
On Sun, 8 Oct 2023 06:18:13 GMT, Danny Thomas wrote:
> A [discussion on
> Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/java/comments/171t5sj/heads_up_openjdk_implementation_of_avx512_based/)
> raised that this had the potential to regress sort performance on AMD Zen 4.
> The poster didn't have access to
On Sun, 8 Oct 2023 06:18:13 GMT, Danny Thomas wrote:
> A [discussion on
> Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/java/comments/171t5sj/heads_up_openjdk_implementation_of_avx512_based/)
> raised that this had the potential to regress sort performance on AMD Zen 4.
> The poster didn't have access to
On Thu, 5 Oct 2023 23:36:48 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa wrote:
>> The goal is to develop faster sort routines for x86_64 CPUs by taking
>> advantage of AVX512 instructions. This enhancement provides an order of
>> magnitude speedup for Arrays.sort() using int, long, float
On Thu, 5 Oct 2023 23:36:48 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa wrote:
>> The goal is to develop faster sort routines for x86_64 CPUs by taking
>> advantage of AVX512 instructions. This enhancement provides an order of
>> magnitude speedup for Arrays.sort() using int, long, float
On Tue, 30 May 2023 18:54:50 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
> The goal is to develop faster sort routines for x86_64 CPUs by taking
> advantage of AVX512 instructions. This enhancement provides an order of
> magnitude speedup for Arrays.sort() using int, long, float and doub
On Tue, 30 May 2023 18:54:50 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
> The goal is to develop faster sort routines for x86_64 CPUs by taking
> advantage of AVX512 instructions. This enhancement provides an order of
> magnitude speedup for Arrays.sort() using int, long, float and doub
On Fri, 6 Oct 2023 18:28:21 GMT, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
> My tier1-7 testing passed. Good.
Thank you, Vladimir!
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/14227#issuecomment-1751254526
On Fri, 6 Oct 2023 18:28:21 GMT, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
> My tier1-7 testing passed. Good.
Thank you, Vladimir!
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/14227#issuecomment-1751254526
raysSort.longSort | 100 | 0.76| 0.58
> | 1.3 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1000| 10.449 | 6.239
> | 1.7 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1 | 307.074 | 70.284
> | **4.4** |
>
On Thu, 5 Oct 2023 18:46:46 GMT, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
> In general it looks good. I have some code style comments and file name
> change request. After you fix that I will need to rerun testing for it before
> approval.
Hello Vladimir (@vnkozlov),
Thank you for the suggestions related to
On Thu, 5 Oct 2023 18:46:46 GMT, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
> In general it looks good. I have some code style comments and file name
> change request. After you fix that I will need to rerun testing for it before
> approval.
Hello Vladimir (@vnkozlov),
Thank you for the suggestions related to
raysSort.longSort | 100 | 0.76| 0.58
> | 1.3 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1000| 10.449 | 6.239
> | 1.7 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1 | 307.074 | 70.284
> | **4.4** |
>
raysSort.longSort | 100 | 0.76| 0.58
> | 1.3 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1000| 10.449 | 6.239
> | 1.7 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1 | 307.074 | 70.284
> | **4.4** |
>
raysSort.longSort | 100 | 0.76| 0.58
> | 1.3 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1000| 10.449 | 6.239
> | 1.7 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1 | 307.074 | 70.284
> | **4.4** |
>
On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 16:44:52 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
>> Srinivas Vamsi Parasa has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> change variable names of indexPivot* to pivotIndex*
>
> test/jdk/java/ut
On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 16:44:52 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
>> Srinivas Vamsi Parasa has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> change variable names of indexPivot* to pivotIndex*
>
> test/jdk/java/ut
On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 07:43:47 GMT, iaroslavski wrote:
>> Laurent Bourgès has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> updated comments (v23.08)
>
>> Hi Vladimir,
>>
>> Just trying to understand: is there a reason to use
>>
On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 09:32:18 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> Srinivas Vamsi Parasa has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> change variable names of indexPivot* to pivotIndex*
>
> make/modu
On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 09:32:18 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> Srinivas Vamsi Parasa has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> change variable names of indexPivot* to pivotIndex*
>
> make/modu
On Wed, 20 Sep 2023 17:19:42 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> The goal is to develop faster sort routines for x86_64 CPUs by taking
>> advantage of AVX512 instructions. This enhancement provides an order of
>> magnitude speedup for Arrays.sort() using int, long, float
On Wed, 20 Sep 2023 17:19:42 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> The goal is to develop faster sort routines for x86_64 CPUs by taking
>> advantage of AVX512 instructions. This enhancement provides an order of
>> magnitude speedup for Arrays.sort() using int, long, float
raysSort.longSort | 100 | 0.76| 0.58
> | 1.3 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1000| 10.449 | 6.239
> | 1.7 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1 | 307.074 | 70.284
> | **4.4** |
>
On Wed, 20 Sep 2023 07:18:55 GMT, iaroslavski wrote:
> ... and suggestion to improve naming: there are inconsistent new names:
> pivotIndices, indexPivot1 and indexPivot2. I think names pivotIndices,
> pivotIndex1 and pivotIndex2 will be better. Do you agree?
Please see the variable names
On Wed, 20 Sep 2023 07:18:55 GMT, iaroslavski wrote:
> ... and suggestion to improve naming: there are inconsistent new names:
> pivotIndices, indexPivot1 and indexPivot2. I think names pivotIndices,
> pivotIndex1 and pivotIndex2 will be better. Do you agree?
Please see the variable names
raysSort.longSort | 100 | 0.76| 0.58
> | 1.3 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1000| 10.449 | 6.239
> | 1.7 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1 | 307.074 | 70.284
> | **4.4** |
>
On Tue, 19 Sep 2023 01:57:44 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> The goal is to develop faster sort routines for x86_64 CPUs by taking
>> advantage of AVX512 instructions. This enhancement provides an order of
>> magnitude speedup for Arrays.sort() using int, long, float
On Tue, 19 Sep 2023 01:57:44 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> The goal is to develop faster sort routines for x86_64 CPUs by taking
>> advantage of AVX512 instructions. This enhancement provides an order of
>> magnitude speedup for Arrays.sort() using int, long, float
On Tue, 19 Sep 2023 01:57:44 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> The goal is to develop faster sort routines for x86_64 CPUs by taking
>> advantage of AVX512 instructions. This enhancement provides an order of
>> magnitude speedup for Arrays.sort() using int, long, float
On Tue, 19 Sep 2023 01:57:44 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> The goal is to develop faster sort routines for x86_64 CPUs by taking
>> advantage of AVX512 instructions. This enhancement provides an order of
>> magnitude speedup for Arrays.sort() using int, long, float
On Mon, 18 Sep 2023 20:08:31 GMT, iaroslavski wrote:
>> Srinivas Vamsi Parasa has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Remove the unnecessary exception in single pivot partitioning fallback
>> m
On Mon, 18 Sep 2023 20:08:31 GMT, iaroslavski wrote:
>> Srinivas Vamsi Parasa has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Remove the unnecessary exception in single pivot partitioning fallback
>> m
raysSort.longSort | 100 | 0.76| 0.58
> | 1.3 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1000| 10.449 | 6.239
> | 1.7 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1 | 307.074 | 70.284
> | **4.4**
raysSort.longSort | 100 | 0.76| 0.58
> | 1.3 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1000| 10.449 | 6.239
> | 1.7 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1 | 307.074 | 70.284
> | **4.4**
On Mon, 18 Sep 2023 18:54:07 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> The goal is to develop faster sort routines for x86_64 CPUs by taking
>> advantage of AVX512 instructions. This enhancement provides an order of
>> magnitude speedup for Arrays.sort() using int, long, float
On Mon, 18 Sep 2023 18:54:07 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> The goal is to develop faster sort routines for x86_64 CPUs by taking
>> advantage of AVX512 instructions. This enhancement provides an order of
>> magnitude speedup for Arrays.sort() using int, long, float
On Fri, 15 Sep 2023 22:17:42 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> The goal is to develop faster sort routines for x86_64 CPUs by taking
>> advantage of AVX512 instructions. This enhancement provides an order of
>> magnitude speedup for Arrays.sort() using int, long, float
raysSort.longSort | 100 | 0.76| 0.58
> | 1.3 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1000| 10.449 | 6.239
> | 1.7 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1 | 307.074 | 70.284
> | **4.4** |
&
On Fri, 15 Sep 2023 22:17:42 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> The goal is to develop faster sort routines for x86_64 CPUs by taking
>> advantage of AVX512 instructions. This enhancement provides an order of
>> magnitude speedup for Arrays.sort() using int, long, float
On Sat, 16 Sep 2023 22:49:14 GMT, iaroslavski wrote:
>> Hello Paul,
>>
>> As suggested, the functional interfaces were moved next to the associated
>> methods and also added a `@ForceInline` for `arraySort` in the latest commit.
>>
>>> I recommend embedding the functional interfaces next to
On Sat, 16 Sep 2023 22:49:14 GMT, iaroslavski wrote:
>> Hello Paul,
>>
>> As suggested, the functional interfaces were moved next to the associated
>> methods and also added a `@ForceInline` for `arraySort` in the latest commit.
>>
>>> I recommend embedding the functional interfaces next to
raysSort.longSort | 100 | 0.76| 0.58
> | 1.3 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1000| 10.449 | 6.239
> | 1.7 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1 | 307.074 | 70.284
> | **4.4** |
&
On Wed, 13 Sep 2023 23:00:23 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> The goal is to develop faster sort routines for x86_64 CPUs by taking
>> advantage of AVX512 instructions. This enhancement provides an order of
>> magnitude speedup for Arrays.sort() using int, long, float
raysSort.longSort | 100 | 0.76| 0.58
> | 1.3 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1000| 10.449 | 6.239
> | 1.7 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1 | 307.074 | 70.284
> |
On Wed, 13 Sep 2023 23:00:23 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> The goal is to develop faster sort routines for x86_64 CPUs by taking
>> advantage of AVX512 instructions. This enhancement provides an order of
>> magnitude speedup for Arrays.sort() using int, long, float
raysSort.longSort | 100 | 0.76| 0.58
> | 1.3 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1000| 10.449 | 6.239
> | 1.7 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1 | 307.074 | 70.284
> |
raysSort.longSort | 100 | 0.76| 0.58
> | 1.3 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1000| 10.449 | 6.239
> | 1.7 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1 | 307.074 | 70.284
> |
On Wed, 13 Sep 2023 23:00:23 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> The goal is to develop faster sort routines for x86_64 CPUs by taking
>> advantage of AVX512 instructions. This enhancement provides an order of
>> magnitude speedup for Arrays.sort() using int, long, float
On Wed, 13 Sep 2023 23:00:23 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> The goal is to develop faster sort routines for x86_64 CPUs by taking
>> advantage of AVX512 instructions. This enhancement provides an order of
>> magnitude speedup for Arrays.sort() using int, long, float
raysSort.longSort | 100 | 0.76| 0.58
> | 1.3 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1000| 10.449 | 6.239
> | 1.7 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1 | 307.074 | 70.284
> |
raysSort.longSort | 100 | 0.76| 0.58
> | 1.3 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1000| 10.449 | 6.239
> | 1.7 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1 | 307.074 | 70.284
> | **4
On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 18:17:41 GMT, Jatin Bhateja wrote:
>> Srinivas Vamsi Parasa has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Fix regression when intrinsics are disabled; enable insertion sort in
>>
On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 18:17:41 GMT, Jatin Bhateja wrote:
>> Srinivas Vamsi Parasa has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Fix regression when intrinsics are disabled; enable insertion sort in
>>
raysSort.longSort | 100 | 0.76| 0.58
> | 1.3 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1000| 10.449 | 6.239
> | 1.7 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1 | 307.074 | 70.284
> | **4
On Fri, 8 Sep 2023 05:33:49 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> Would it be possible to provide a clear summary on why libx86_64_sort is
> being added? I'm trying to understand why these weren't linked into libjvm.
Hello Alan,
Initially, the reason behind adding libx86_64 (now renamed to libsimdsort
On Fri, 8 Sep 2023 05:33:49 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> Would it be possible to provide a clear summary on why libx86_64_sort is
> being added? I'm trying to understand why these weren't linked into libjvm.
Hello Alan,
Initially, the reason behind adding libx86_64 (now renamed to libsimdsort
On Fri, 8 Sep 2023 18:10:33 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa wrote:
>> The goal is to develop faster sort routines for x86_64 CPUs by taking
>> advantage of AVX512 instructions. This enhancement provides an order of
>> magnitude speedup for Arrays.sort() using int, long, float
On Fri, 8 Sep 2023 18:10:33 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa wrote:
>> The goal is to develop faster sort routines for x86_64 CPUs by taking
>> advantage of AVX512 instructions. This enhancement provides an order of
>> magnitude speedup for Arrays.sort() using int, long, float
On Fri, 1 Sep 2023 10:57:57 GMT, iaroslavski wrote:
>>> @AlanBateman If it helps, the changes made by @vamsi-parasa to
>>> DualPivotQuickSort.java don't change the logic as written in Java. They
>>> only carve out the functionality into separate Java methods retaining the
>>> meaning exactly
On Fri, 1 Sep 2023 10:57:57 GMT, iaroslavski wrote:
>>> @AlanBateman If it helps, the changes made by @vamsi-parasa to
>>> DualPivotQuickSort.java don't change the logic as written in Java. They
>>> only carve out the functionality into separate Java methods retaining the
>>> meaning exactly
On Fri, 8 Sep 2023 18:10:33 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa wrote:
>> The goal is to develop faster sort routines for x86_64 CPUs by taking
>> advantage of AVX512 instructions. This enhancement provides an order of
>> magnitude speedup for Arrays.sort() using int, long, float
On Fri, 8 Sep 2023 18:10:33 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa wrote:
>> The goal is to develop faster sort routines for x86_64 CPUs by taking
>> advantage of AVX512 instructions. This enhancement provides an order of
>> magnitude speedup for Arrays.sort() using int, long, float
raysSort.longSort | 100 | 0.76| 0.58
> | 1.3 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1000| 10.449 | 6.239
> | 1.7 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1 | 307.074 | 70.284
> | **
raysSort.longSort | 100 | 0.76| 0.58
> | 1.3 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1000| 10.449 | 6.239
> | 1.7 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1 | 307.074 | 70.284
> | **
On Thu, 31 Aug 2023 21:31:40 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> The goal is to develop faster sort routines for x86_64 CPUs by taking
>> advantage of AVX512 instructions. This enhancement provides an order of
>> magnitude speedup for Arrays.sort() using int, long, float
On Thu, 31 Aug 2023 21:31:40 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> The goal is to develop faster sort routines for x86_64 CPUs by taking
>> advantage of AVX512 instructions. This enhancement provides an order of
>> magnitude speedup for Arrays.sort() using int, long, float
On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 15:10:45 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>>> Hi Vladimir, Just verified that the test/jdk/java/util/Arrays/Sorting.java
>>> is triggering the intrinsic without additional flags
>>
>> Just to add that Sorting.java has short and long run modes
On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 15:10:45 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>>> Hi Vladimir, Just verified that the test/jdk/java/util/Arrays/Sorting.java
>>> is triggering the intrinsic without additional flags
>>
>> Just to add that Sorting.java has short and long run modes
raysSort.longSort | 100 | 0.76| 0.58
> | 1.3 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1000| 10.449 | 6.239
> | 1.7 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1 | 307.074 | 70.284
> | **4.4** |
>
raysSort.longSort | 100 | 0.76| 0.58
> | 1.3 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1000| 10.449 | 6.239
> | 1.7 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1 | 307.074 | 70.284
> | **4.4** |
>
On Mon, 28 Aug 2023 23:29:43 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>> Srinivas Vamsi Parasa has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Clean up parameters passed to arrayPartition; update the check to load
>
On Mon, 28 Aug 2023 23:29:43 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>> Srinivas Vamsi Parasa has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Clean up parameters passed to arrayPartition; update the check to load
>
raysSort.longSort | 100 | 0.76| 0.58
> | 1.3 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1000| 10.449 | 6.239
> | 1.7 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1 | 307.074 | 70.284
> | **4.4** |
> |
raysSort.longSort | 100 | 0.76| 0.58
> | 1.3 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1000| 10.449 | 6.239
> | 1.7 |
> | ArraysSort.longSort | 1 | 307.074 | 70.284
> | **4.4** |
> |
101 - 200 of 248 matches
Mail list logo
