Am 15.01.2007 um 22:37 schrieb Zoran Vasiljevic:
Am 15.01.2007 um 22:22 schrieb Mike:
Zoran, I believe you misunderstood. The "patch" above limits blocks
allocated by your tester to 16000 instead of 16384 blocks. The
reason
for this is that Zippy's "largest bucket" is configured to be
On 1/16/07, Zoran Vasiljevic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Am 15.01.2007 um 22:37 schrieb Zoran Vasiljevic:
>
> Am 15.01.2007 um 22:22 schrieb Mike:
>
>>
>> Zoran, I believe you misunderstood. The "patch" above limits blocks
>> allocated by your tester to 16000 instead of 16384 blocks. The
>> re
This is most probably the best variabt so far, and not complicated, such a
optimizer can do "the right thing" easily. sorry for the many versions..
-gustaf
{ unsigned register int s = (size-1) >> 3;
while (s>1) { s >>= 1; bucket++; }
}
if (bucket > NBUCKETS) {
bucket = NBU
Am 16.01.2007 um 10:46 schrieb Gustaf Neumann:
This is most probably the best variabt so far, and not complicated,
such a
optimizer can do "the right thing" easily. sorry for the many
versions..
-gustaf
{ unsigned register int s = (size-1) >> 3;
while (s>1) { s >>= 1; bucket++; }
Am 16.01.2007 um 10:46 schrieb Gustaf Neumann:
s = (size-1) >> 3;
while (s>1) { s >>= 1; bucket++;
On Linux and Solaris (both x86 machines)
the "long" version:
s = (size-1) >> 4;
while (s > 0xFF) {
s = s >> 5;
bucket += 5;
}
while (s > 0x0F) {
s
Zoran Vasiljevic schrieb:
Am 16.01.2007 um 10:46 schrieb Gustaf Neumann:
This is most probably the best variabt so far, and not complicated,
such a
optimizer can do "the right thing" easily. sorry for the many versions..
-gustaf
{ unsigned register int s = (size-1) >> 3;
while (s>1)
Am 16.01.2007 um 11:24 schrieb Gustaf Neumann:
if all cases are used, all but the first loops are executed
mostly once and could be changed into ifs... i will send
you with a separate mail on such variant, but i am running
currently out of battery.
Guess what: it is _slower_ now then the
Am 16.01.2007 um 10:37 schrieb Stephen Deasey:
Can you import this into CVS? Top level.
You mean the tclThreadAlloc.c file on top-level
of the naviserver project?
Zoran Vasiljevic schrieb:
Guess what: it is _slower_ now then the
s = (size-1) >> 3;
while (s>1) {s >>= 1; bucket++;}
I tend to like that one as it is really neat.
It will also better illustrate what is being
done.
this is the last for today. It is the unrolled variant, with l
On 1/16/07, Zoran Vasiljevic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Am 16.01.2007 um 10:37 schrieb Stephen Deasey:
>
> Can you import this into CVS? Top level.
>
You mean the tclThreadAlloc.c file on top-level
of the naviserver project?
The whole thing: README, licence, tests etc. By top level, I ju
Am 16.01.2007 um 12:18 schrieb Stephen Deasey:
vtmalloc <-- add this
It's there. Everybody can now contribute, if needed.
On 1/16/07, Zoran Vasiljevic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Am 16.01.2007 um 12:18 schrieb Stephen Deasey:
> vtmalloc <-- add this
It's there. Everybody can now contribute, if needed.
Rocking.
I suggest putting the 0.0.3 tarball up on sourceforge, announcing on
Freshmeat, and cross-posting
On 1/16/07, Stephen Deasey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 1/16/07, Zoran Vasiljevic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Am 16.01.2007 um 12:18 schrieb Stephen Deasey:
>
> > vtmalloc <-- add this
>
> It's there. Everybody can now contribute, if needed.
>
Rocking.
I suggest putting the 0.0.3 tarball
Am 16.01.2007 um 15:41 schrieb Stephen Deasey:
I suggest putting the 0.0.3 tarball up on sourceforge, announcing on
Freshmeat, and cross-posting on the aolserver list. You really want
random people with their random workloads on random OS to beat on
this. I don't know if the pool of people h
Yes, it is combined version, but Tcl version is slightly different and
Zoran took it over to maintain, in my tarball i include both, we do
experiments in different directions and then combine best results.
Also the intention was to try to include it in Tcl itself.
Stephen Deasey wrote:
On 1/1
Am 16.01.2007 um 15:52 schrieb Zoran Vasiljevic:
You see, even we (i.e. Mike) noticed one glitch in the
test program that make Zippy look ridiculous on the Mac,
although it wasn't.
Hmhmhmh... I must have done something very wrong :-(
When I now repeat the tests on Mac/Zippy, even with the
s
Gustaf Neumann wrote:
This is most probably the best variabt so far, and not complicated, such a
optimizer can do "the right thing" easily. sorry for the many versions..
-gustaf
{ unsigned register int s = (size-1) >> 3;
while (s>1) { s >>= 1; bucket++; }
}
if (bucket >
Hi Jeff,
we are aware that the funciton is essentially an integer log2.
The chosen C-based variant is acually faster and more general than
what you have included (it needs only max 2 shift operations for
the relevant range) but the assembler based variant is hard to beat
and yields another 3% for
18 matches
Mail list logo
