Hi everyone, I know had raised these questions in the PR, but wanted to post them in the mailing list as well.
1) Once NumPy adds the framework and initial set of Universal Intrinsic, if contributors want to leverage a new architecture specific SIMD instruction, will they be expected to add software implementation of this instruction for all other architectures too? 2) On whom does the burden lie to ensure that new implementations are benchmarked and shows benefits on every architecture? What happens if optimizing an Ufunc leads to improving performance on one architecture and worsens performance on another? Thanks, Raghuveer -----Original Message----- From: NumPy-Discussion <numpy-discussion-bounces+raghuveer.devulapalli=intel....@python.org> On Behalf Of Daniele Nicolodi Sent: Tuesday, February 4, 2020 10:01 AM To: numpy-discussion@python.org Subject: Re: [Numpy-discussion] NEP 38 - Universal SIMD intrinsics On 04-02-2020 08:08, Matti Picus wrote: > Together with Sayed Adel (cc) and Ralf, I am pleased to put the draft > version of NEP 38 [0] up for discussion. As per NEP 0, this is the > next step in the community accepting the approach layed out in the > NEP. The NEP PR [1] has already garnered a fair amount of discussion > about the viability of Universal SIMD Intrinsics, so I will try to > capture some of that here as well. Hello, more interesting prior art may be found in VOLK https://www.libvolk.org. VOLK is developed mainly to be used in GNURadio, and this reflects in the available kernels and in the supported data types, I think the approach used there may be of interest. Cheers, Dan _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
