rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove (was: Why VAX ..)

Liste des GroupesRevenir à c arch 
Sujet : rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove (was: Why VAX ..)
De : anton (at) *nospam* mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl)
Groupes : comp.arch
Date : 12. Mar 2025, 17:46:36
Autres entêtes
Organisation : Institut fuer Computersprachen, Technische Universitaet Wien
Message-ID : <2025Mar12.174636@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
User-Agent : xrn 10.11
Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:
On Wed, 12 Mar 2025 11:28:36 GMT
anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) wrote:
My experiments were with the code in
<https://github.com/AntonErtl/move/>.
>
Non of those are simple loops that I mentioned above.

They are not.  If you want short code, rep movsb is unbeatable (for
memmove(), you have to do a little more, however).

 I posted performance results in
<2017Sep19.082137@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>
<2017Sep20.184358@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>
<2017Sep23.174313@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>
 
My routines were generally faster than rep movsb, except for pretty
large blocks (16KB).
 
>
Idiots from corporate IT blocked http://al.howardknight.net/

I feel with you.  In my workplace, Usenet is blocked (probably
unintentionally).  I have to post from home.

So, link to google groups

Sorry, I cannot provide that service.  Trying to access
groups.google.com tells me:

|Couldn’t sign you in
|
|The browser you’re using doesn’t support JavaScript, or has JavaScript
|turned off.
|
|To keep your Google Account secure, try signing in on a browser that
|has JavaScript turned on.

I certainly won't turn on JavaScript for Google, and apparently Google
wants me to log in to a Google account to access groups.google.com.  I
don't have a Google account and I don't want one.

But all I would do is try whether google groups finds the message-ids.
You can do that yourself.

or, if posts are relatively recent, to
https://www.novabbs.com/devel/thread.php?group=comp.arch
would be helpful.

The posts are from 2017; these message-ids are not random-generated.

I don't know why gnu memcpy is huge. I don't even know if it is
really *that* huge. But several KB is number that I had seen
stated by other people.

I stated in one of these messages that I have seen an 11KB memmove in
glibc.  Let's see:

objdump -t /debian8/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.a|grep .text|grep 'memmove'
00000000000001a0 g   i   .text  0000000000000047 __libc_memmove
0000000000000000 g     F .text  000000000000019f __memmove_sse2
00000000000001a0 g   i   .text  0000000000000047 memmove
0000000000000000 g     F .text.ssse3    0000000000000009 __memmove_chk_ssse3
0000000000000010 g     F .text.ssse3    0000000000002b67 __memmove_ssse3
0000000000000000 g     F .text.ssse3    0000000000000009 __memmove_chk_ssse3_back
0000000000000010 g     F .text.ssse3    0000000000002b06 __memmove_ssse3_back
...

Yes, 11111 bytes for __memmove_ssse3.  Debian 8 is one of the systems
I used at the time.

Let's see how it looks in Debian 12:

objdump -t /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.a|grep .text|grep 'memmove'|grep -v wmemmove
0000000000000000 l     F .text  00000000000000f6 __libc_memmove_ifunc
0000000000000000 g   i   .text  00000000000000f6 __libc_memmove
0000000000000000 g   i   .text  00000000000000f6 memmove
0000000000000010 g     F .text.avx      000000000000002f __memmove_avx_unaligned
0000000000000080 g     F .text.avx      00000000000006de __memmove_avx_unaligned_erms
0000000000000010 g     F .text.avx.rtm  000000000000002d __memmove_avx_unaligned_rtm
0000000000000080 g     F .text.avx.rtm  00000000000006df __memmove_avx_unaligned_erms_rtm
0000000000000020 g     F .text.avx512   0000000000000009 __memmove_chk_avx512_no_vzeroupper
0000000000000030 g     F .text.avx512   000000000000073b __memmove_avx512_no_vzeroupper
0000000000000010 g     F .text.evex512  0000000000000037 __memmove_avx512_unaligned
0000000000000080 g     F .text.evex512  00000000000007a0 __memmove_avx512_unaligned_erms
0000000000000020 g     F .text  0000000000000009 __memmove_chk_erms
0000000000000030 g     F .text  000000000000002d __memmove_erms
0000000000000010 g     F .text.evex     0000000000000034 __memmove_evex_unaligned
0000000000000080 g     F .text.evex     00000000000007bb __memmove_evex_unaligned_erms
0000000000000010 g     F .text  0000000000000028 __memmove_sse2_unaligned
0000000000000080 g     F .text  0000000000000552 __memmove_sse2_unaligned_erms
0000000000000040 g     F .text.ssse3    0000000000000f3d __memmove_ssse3
0000000000000000 g     F .text  000000000000000e __memmove_chk

So __memmove_ssse3 is no longer that big ("only" 3901 bytes); it's
still the biggest implementation, but many others are quite a bit
bigger than the 0x113=275 bytes of my ssememmove.

- anton
--
'Anyone trying for "industrial quality" ISA should avoid undefined behavior.'
  Mitch Alsup, <c17fcd89-f024-40e7-a594-88a85ac10d20o@googlegroups.com>

Date Sujet#  Auteur
1 Mar 25 * Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC230Lawrence D'Oliveiro
1 Mar 25 +* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC220Anton Ertl
1 Mar 25 i+* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC25MitchAlsup1
1 Mar 25 ii+- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1Thomas Koenig
2 Mar 25 ii`* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC23Anton Ertl
2 Mar 25 ii +* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC6Robert Swindells
2 Mar 25 ii i+* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC4Anton Ertl
5 Mar 25 ii ii`* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC3Robert Swindells
6 Mar 25 ii ii `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC2Lawrence D'Oliveiro
6 Mar 25 ii ii  `- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1MitchAlsup1
2 Mar 25 ii i`- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1Lynn Wheeler
2 Mar 25 ii +* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC4MitchAlsup1
2 Mar 25 ii i`* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC3Lawrence D'Oliveiro
3 Mar 25 ii i `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC2MitchAlsup1
3 Mar 25 ii i  `- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
2 Mar 25 ii +- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1BGB
3 Mar 25 ii `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC11Anton Ertl
3 Mar 25 ii  +* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC9Thomas Koenig
3 Mar 25 ii  i`* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC8Anton Ertl
5 Mar 25 ii  i `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC7Thomas Koenig
6 Mar 25 ii  i  `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC6Thomas Koenig
8 Mar 25 ii  i   `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC5Anton Ertl
8 Mar 25 ii  i    +- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1MitchAlsup1
9 Mar 25 ii  i    `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC3Torbjorn Lindgren
9 Mar 25 ii  i     `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC2MitchAlsup1
9 Mar 25 ii  i      `- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1Thomas Koenig
4 Mar 25 ii  `- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1Anton Ertl
1 Mar 25 i+* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC2Anton Ertl
2 Mar 25 ii`- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1Keith Thompson
1 Mar 25 i+* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC160John Levine
1 Mar 25 ii`* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC159Anton Ertl
2 Mar 25 ii +* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC6Lawrence D'Oliveiro
2 Mar 25 ii i`* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC5Anton Ertl
2 Mar 25 ii i +* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC3Lawrence D'Oliveiro
3 Mar 25 ii i i`* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC2Anton Ertl
4 Mar 25 ii i i `- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
2 Mar 25 ii i `- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1MitchAlsup1
2 Mar 25 ii +- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1Lynn Wheeler
2 Mar 25 ii `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC151John Levine
2 Mar 25 ii  +- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
2 Mar 25 ii  `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC149Anton Ertl
3 Mar 25 ii   +* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC6John Levine
3 Mar 25 ii   i+- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
3 Mar 25 ii   i`* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC4Anton Ertl
3 Mar 25 ii   i +* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC2Michael S
3 Mar 25 ii   i i`- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1Anton Ertl
4 Mar 25 ii   i `- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
3 Mar 25 ii   +* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC3Thomas Koenig
3 Mar 25 ii   i`* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC2Anton Ertl
3 Mar 25 ii   i `- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1BGB
3 Mar 25 ii   `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC139MarkC
3 Mar 25 ii    `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC138Anton Ertl
3 Mar 25 ii     +* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC135Thomas Koenig
4 Mar 25 ii     i`* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC134Lawrence D'Oliveiro
4 Mar 25 ii     i +- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1BGB
4 Mar 25 ii     i `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC132Anton Ertl
5 Mar 25 ii     i  `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC131Lawrence D'Oliveiro
5 Mar 25 ii     i   `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC130Anton Ertl
6 Mar 25 ii     i    +* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC3John Levine
7 Mar 25 ii     i    i`* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC2Lynn Wheeler
8 Mar 25 ii     i    i `- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1Thomas Koenig
7 Mar 25 ii     i    `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC126Waldek Hebisch
7 Mar 25 ii     i     +* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC123Lawrence D'Oliveiro
7 Mar 25 ii     i     i+* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC66BGB
7 Mar 25 ii     i     ii+* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC61MitchAlsup1
7 Mar 25 ii     i     iii+* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC2Robert Finch
7 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii`- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1MitchAlsup1
7 Mar 25 ii     i     iii+* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC55BGB
7 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii+- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1MitchAlsup1
8 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii`* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC53Robert Finch
8 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC52BGB
8 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii  `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC51MitchAlsup1
9 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii   +- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
10 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii   `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC49BGB
11 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii    +* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC2Lawrence D'Oliveiro
11 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii    i`- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1BGB
11 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii    `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC46MitchAlsup1
11 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     +* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC40Robert Finch
11 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     i+* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC7BGB
11 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     ii`* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC6MitchAlsup1
11 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     ii `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC5Terje Mathisen
11 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     ii  +- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1David Schultz
11 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     ii  `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC3Lawrence D'Oliveiro
12 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     ii   `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC2Anton Ertl
12 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     ii    `- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
11 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     i`* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC32MitchAlsup1
11 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     i `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC31Stephen Fuld
11 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     i  +* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC6MitchAlsup1
11 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     i  i+* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC4Stephen Fuld
11 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     i  ii`* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC3Lawrence D'Oliveiro
12 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     i  ii `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC2BGB
12 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     i  ii  `- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
12 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     i  i`- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1BGB
11 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     i  +* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC15moi
11 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     i  i+* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC12Stephen Fuld
11 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     i  ii+* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC10Lawrence D'Oliveiro
12 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     i  iii+* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC6BGB
12 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     i  iiii+* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC2Lawrence D'Oliveiro
12 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     i  iiiii`- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1Stephen Fuld
12 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     i  iiii`* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC3MitchAlsup1
12 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     i  iiii `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC2BGB
12 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     i  iii+- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1MitchAlsup1
12 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     i  iii`* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC2Anton Ertl
12 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     i  ii`- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1moi
12 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     i  i`* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC2MitchAlsup1
11 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     i  +* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC2Lawrence D'Oliveiro
12 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     i  +* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC4John Levine
12 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     i  `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC3Anton Ertl
11 Mar 25 ii     i     iiii     `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC5BGB
7 Mar 25 ii     i     iii+* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC2MitchAlsup1
8 Mar 25 ii     i     iii`- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1BGB
7 Mar 25 ii     i     ii`* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC4Robert Finch
7 Mar 25 ii     i     i+* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC4MitchAlsup1
7 Mar 25 ii     i     i+- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1MitchAlsup1
11 Mar 25 ii     i     i`* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC51Waldek Hebisch
7 Mar 25 ii     i     `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC2Michael S
3 Mar 25 ii     `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC2Robert Swindells
1 Mar 25 i+* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC28BGB
2 Mar 25 i+* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC2Lawrence D'Oliveiro
5 Mar 25 i`* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC2Stefan Monnier
1 Mar 25 +- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1MitchAlsup1
2 Mar 25 +* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC5Lawrence D'Oliveiro
2 Mar 25 +- Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC1MitchAlsup1
5 Mar 25 `* Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC2Theo

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal