Em seg., 29 de jan. de 2024 às 19:40, Nathan Bossart <
nathandboss...@gmail.com> escreveu:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 11:23:57AM +1300, David Rowley wrote:
> > On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 at 08:32, Nathan Bossart
> wrote:
> >> I'm currently +0.1 for this change. I don't see any huge problem with
> >>
On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 11:23:57AM +1300, David Rowley wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 at 08:32, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> I'm currently +0.1 for this change. I don't see any huge problem with
>> trimming a few instructions, but I'm dubious there's any measurable impact.
>> However, a cycle saved is
On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 at 08:32, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> I'm currently +0.1 for this change. I don't see any huge problem with
> trimming a few instructions, but I'm dubious there's any measurable impact.
> However, a cycle saved is a cycle earned...
FWIW, In [1] and subsequent replies, there are
On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 04:43:32PM -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> Em seg., 29 de jan. de 2024 às 16:32, Nathan Bossart <
> nathandboss...@gmail.com> escreveu:
>> -#define WORDNUM(x) ((x) / BITS_PER_BITMAPWORD)
>> -#define BITNUM(x) ((x) % BITS_PER_BITMAPWORD)
>> +#define WORDNUM(x)
Em seg., 29 de jan. de 2024 às 16:32, Nathan Bossart <
nathandboss...@gmail.com> escreveu:
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 01:30:47PM -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> > IMO I believe that bitmapset can obtain an optimization in the
> calculation
> > of the WORDNUM and BITNUM macros.
> >
> > As you know,
On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 01:30:47PM -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> IMO I believe that bitmapset can obtain an optimization in the calculation
> of the WORDNUM and BITNUM macros.
>
> As you know, in bitmapset, negative members are not allowed.
>
> if (x < 0)
> elog(ERROR, "negative bitmapset member
Hi,
IMO I believe that bitmapset can obtain an optimization in the calculation
of the WORDNUM and BITNUM macros.
As you know, in bitmapset, negative members are not allowed.
if (x < 0)
elog(ERROR, "negative bitmapset member not allowed");
Then, allow the compiler to optimize and do the
