Skip to content
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

Attempt to support to 64 lanes #197

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 23, 2021
Merged

Attempt to support to 64 lanes #197

merged 1 commit into from
Nov 23, 2021

Conversation

workingjubilee
Copy link
Member

We can try to expand our support, and test suite, to allow Simd<T, 64>.

@workingjubilee
Copy link
Member Author

While highly unscientific, this branch's test suite passes compilation on @thomcc's Apple Silicon laptop also, so I think it would be fair to go for it, here.

@calebzulawski
Copy link
Member

I would add aliases for the new sizes, then lgtm.

@workingjubilee
Copy link
Member Author

We... never actually removed the 64-lane aliases, and we've generally been following the "what aliases would make sense if the lanes were {B} bits wide" where B == LEN * T::BITS, so we already have those, actually. So! If there are any new alias conventions we can bikeshed them later.

Merging.

@workingjubilee workingjubilee merged commit ced3a05 into master Nov 23, 2021
@pthariensflame
Copy link
Contributor

I think the vendor conversions may be missing. In particular AVX512 byte vectors lack conversions.

@workingjubilee
Copy link
Member Author

workingjubilee commented Nov 24, 2021

Hm. True but also:

@jorgecarleitao
Copy link
Contributor

fwiw we already accepted usizex8 and isizex8, which in x86 is 512 bits wide.

pthariensflame added a commit to pthariensflame/portable-simd that referenced this pull request Nov 25, 2021
Resolves my comment in rust-lang#197, at least for now; rust-lang#187 is pending but since these are already here, just commented, it seemed to make sense to me to re-enable them anyway.
workingjubilee pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 26, 2021
Resolves my comment in #197, at least for now; #187 is pending but since these are already here, just commented, it seemed to make sense to me to re-enable them anyway.
@workingjubilee workingjubilee deleted the support-64-lanes branch December 3, 2021 04:11
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants