Il Mer, 22 Febbraio 2012 8:32 pm, Torbjorn Granlund ha scritto:
bodr...@mail.dm.unipi.it writes:
Unrelated :-) We might define more macros like TMP_ALLOC_LIMBS_2 . I
Please look at the generated code from TMP_ALLOC from any reasonable
compiler. It is a sub from sp, the a copy from sp to
ni...@lysator.liu.se (Niels Möller) writes:
Torbjorn Granlund t...@gmplib.org writes:
Surely a plain TMP_ALLOC adds red zones? If not, that is something we
ought to fix.
But
tp = TMP_ALLOC_LIMBS (2*n);
xp = tp + n;
does not add any between T and X (intended to
ni...@lysator.liu.se (Niels Möller) writes:
What about the test in
#define TMP_ALLOC(n) \
(LIKELY ((n) 65536) ? TMP_SALLOC(n) : TMP_BALLOC(n))
That test will cost a cycle or two for each TMP_ALLOC call (with
non-constant n), regardless of size, won't it?
I think my previous
Inspired by Marc{,o}'s cleanup commits, I decided to look for TMP_ALLOC*
calls that should be made into TMP_SALLOC* or TMP_BALLOC*. Then I
spotted this unrelated thing:
tp = TMP_ALLOC_LIMBS(talloc);
if (usize n)
{
mpn_tdiv_qr (tp, up, 0, up, usize, vp, n);
if (mpn_zero_p
Ciao,
Il Ven, 24 Febbraio 2012 10:40 am, Torbjorn Granlund ha scritto:
I cannot see how TMP_ALLOC_LIMBS_2 could save *anything* for small
I'm not sure I agree with Torbjorn. Nevertheless developers time is a far
more precious resource than a few cpu cycles or bytes of code size...
That's why I
Torbjorn Granlund t...@gmplib.org writes:
Except that redc does not accept independent sizes. Therefore we need
to use bdiv_qr.
I think it should be easy to generalize at least redc_1 and redc_2 to
accept independent sizes. Might require some more work for redc_n, which
would need some kind
ni...@lysator.liu.se (Niels Möller) writes:
Torbjorn Granlund t...@gmplib.org writes:
Except that redc does not accept independent sizes. Therefore we need
to use bdiv_qr.
I think it should be easy to generalize at least redc_1 and redc_2 to
accept independent sizes. Might
