Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Faster minimum/maximum/extrema #45581
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Faster minimum/maximum/extrema #45581
Changes from all commits
a5bf6a4
aea0ec6
a0b5853
0fc9ce0
130b0e5
02efa06
f00ac8c
81a0ff5
0316ef9
413b739
068082a
a9bd1e8
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Shouldn't it be possible to apply the same series of transformations when reducing along non-first dimensions? Or am I missing where that has already been handled?
EDIT: maybe now I see. This was your comment about the destination array possibly being of a different type. Could this still be done if it has a same-size type (or at least the exact same type) so that they are
reinterpret
-able?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, exactly. And all the optimizations here are
reinterpret
-able.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I dont think non-dim1 cases would be accelerated a lot as we will have to add a
map!(pre, dest, dest)
berfore the kernal loop, and amap!(post, dest, dest)
after it.reinterpret
might be 0-cost, butflipneg
+add offset
+mem access
not.And non dim1 minimum/maximum is vectorlized quite well
On my PC it's faster than dim1 with optimizaiton.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
A simple bench
EDIT: profile shows that the overhead of
map!(pre, b, b)
&map!(post, b, b)
is neglible is this case.