Flatten bytes to sort#9
Merged
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
The presentation of
&mut [[[u8;4];3]]to sort was antagonizing Rust, which treats it differently than a&mut [[u8;12]]. This PR flattens the representation to aVec<u8>and then blocks it out differently usingas_chunks_mutdepending on the need. Improves times from ~18s to ~17.5s.From an investigation prompted by @DAlperin. The investigation suggests there are still a lot more instructions going on than are probably required; e.g. going from counting
lower .. upperback to0 .. R::WIDTHresults in two instructions for each byte, vs a whole bunch. Haven't turned this in to measurable performance improvements yet though.