|
Message-ID: <20210228193733.GF354034@port70.net> Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2021 20:37:33 +0100 From: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net> To: Mattias Andrée <maandree@....se> Cc: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] Use modulo instead of mul+sub in __secs_to_tm * Mattias Andrée <maandree@....se> [2021-02-28 20:22:10 +0100]: > On x86 modulo is free when doing division, so this removes there should be no division. div by const is transformed to mul and shift at -O1 and that's what we should be using instead of manual hacks. https://godbolt.org/z/Wsxq5h > a multiplication and at the cost of replacing a conditional > move with a conditional jump, but it still appears to be > faster. > (Similar architectures: nds32le) > > ARM doesn't have modulo, instead an multiply-and-subtract > operation is done after the division, so the diffence > here is either none at all, or a move and a multiply-and-add > being replaced with a multiply-and-subtract. > (Similar architectures: or1k) > > RISC-V on the other hand has a separate modulo > instruction and will perform a separate modulo instead of > an assignment, a multiplication, and an addition with > this change. GCC does change how the modulo operation is > realised depending on the optimisation level. I don't know > how this affects the performance, however a simple test on > x86 suggests that doing a modulo operations is actually > faster than assign–multiply–add. did you benchmark with CFLAGS=-O2 or -Os ? > --- > src/time/__secs_to_tm.c | 18 +++++++++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/src/time/__secs_to_tm.c b/src/time/__secs_to_tm.c > index 62219df5..348e51ec 100644 > --- a/src/time/__secs_to_tm.c > +++ b/src/time/__secs_to_tm.c > @@ -39,16 +39,28 @@ int __secs_to_tm(long long t, struct tm *tm) > qc_cycles--; > } > > +#if 1 > + c_cycles = remdays / DAYS_PER_100Y; > + remdays %= DAYS_PER_100Y; > + if (c_cycles == 4) { > + remdays += DAYS_PER_100Y; > + c_cycles--; > + } > +#else > c_cycles = remdays / DAYS_PER_100Y; > if (c_cycles == 4) c_cycles--; > remdays -= c_cycles * DAYS_PER_100Y; > +#endif > > q_cycles = remdays / DAYS_PER_4Y; > - remdays -= q_cycles * DAYS_PER_4Y; > + remdays %= DAYS_PER_4Y; > > remyears = remdays / 365; > - if (remyears == 4) remyears--; > - remdays -= remyears * 365; > + remdays %= 365; > + if (remyears == 4) { > + remdays += 365; > + remyears--; > + } > > leap = !remyears && (q_cycles || !c_cycles); > yday = remdays + 31 + 28 + leap; > -- > 2.30.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.