4 ms·
The fact that they are changing to include some vectorization options by default for -O2 suggests otherwise. In particular SLP vectorization should have been th
by phkahler 5y ago
The fact that they are changing to include some vectorization options by default for -O2 suggests otherwise. In particular SLP vectorization should have been there all along. Every graphics library 2d and 3d defines vector classes that will easily go faster with the simplest vectorization.
Arguments around code size have been largely irrelevant for quite some time, so long as performance increases.
If I put on a tinfoil hat, I'd suspect Intel was at least an influence. They're the ones adding AVX, AVX2, 512 and providing their own compiler to take advantage of them, while crippling AMD parts. That is until they switched to LLVM.
- sroussey 5y agoCode size always matters. The code cache in the cpu is far from infinite and long jumps will stall. Sometimes vectorization can shrink code, so yay. And, like you said, if performance increases, then yay again regardless of size.
- ncmncm 5y agoCode size always matters, except for all the times when it doesn't. Or when something else matters more. Code size matters less than it once did, now that we have bigger and smarter caches. But bigger, while sometimes big enough, is never big.