3 ms·
Depending on how you count, the ratio might not be that small. A lot of hot code are written in hand-coded inline assembly, so in terms of CPU cycles run it's p
by RandomBK 2y ago
Depending on how you count, the ratio might not be that small. A lot of hot code are written in hand-coded inline assembly, so in terms of CPU cycles run it's probably non-negligible.
i.e. take a look at the glibc implementation of 'strcmp` [0]
[0] https://github.com/bminor/glibc/blob/master/sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/strcmp-avx2.S#L204 https://github.com/bminor/glibc/blob/master/sysdeps/x86_64/m...
- almostgotcaught 2y ago> A lot of hot code are written in hand-coded inline assembly I know... I write GPU assembly for a living... And still I make that wager. It's not a lot. It's not even a little. It's an epsilon (overall). And it gets smaller over time.
- Kamq 2y agoWhat do you think the percentage of computation is with respect to hand-written vs compiler generated? If small hot loops tend to be disproportionately hand written, and certain programs spend the majority of time in their hot loops, that could still be a decent percentage of time/instructions executed.
- lionkor 2y agoNow how much of that doesn't interface with compiler generated code?