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

[refine](bits) refine bytes_mask_to_bits_mask code (#38360) #43511

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 10, 2024

Conversation

Mryange
Copy link
Contributor

@Mryange Mryange commented Nov 8, 2024

#38360
The previous code only considered the x86 architecture, and _mm_movemask_epi8 does not have a corresponding instruction in ARM. According to the article below, we need to abstract the overall logic. For ARM, optimize using the content mentioned in the following article: filter function origin 0.711375 seconds 0.7154 seconds 0.71782 seconds 0.715296 seconds
filter function arm opt 0.559854 seconds 0.559854 seconds 0.559854 seconds 0.559854 seconds

link

What problem does this PR solve?

Issue Number: close #xxx

Related PR: #xxx

Problem Summary:

Release note

None

Check List (For Author)

  • Test

    • Regression test
    • Unit Test
    • Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
    • No need to test or manual test. Explain why:
      • This is a refactor/code format and no logic has been changed.
      • Previous test can cover this change.
      • No code files have been changed.
      • Other reason
  • Behavior changed:

    • No.
    • Yes.
  • Does this need documentation?

    • No.
    • Yes.

Check List (For Reviewer who merge this PR)

  • Confirm the release note
  • Confirm test cases
  • Confirm document
  • Add branch pick label

The previous code only considered the x86 architecture, and
_mm_movemask_epi8 does not have a corresponding instruction in ARM.
According to the article below, we need to abstract the overall logic.
For ARM, optimize using the content mentioned in the following article:
filter function origin 0.711375 seconds 0.7154 seconds 0.71782 seconds
0.715296 seconds
filter function arm opt 0.559854 seconds 0.559854 seconds 0.559854
seconds 0.559854 seconds

[link](https://community.arm.com/arm-community-blogs/b/infrastructure-solutions-blog/posts/porting-x86-vector-bitmask-optimizations-to-arm-neon?CommentId=af187ac6-ae00-4e4d-bbf0-e142187aa92e)
@doris-robot
Copy link

Thank you for your contribution to Apache Doris.
Don't know what should be done next? See How to process your PR.

Please clearly describe your PR:

  1. What problem was fixed (it's best to include specific error reporting information). How it was fixed.
  2. Which behaviors were modified. What was the previous behavior, what is it now, why was it modified, and what possible impacts might there be.
  3. What features were added. Why was this function added?
  4. Which code was refactored and why was this part of the code refactored?
  5. Which functions were optimized and what is the difference before and after the optimization?

@Mryange
Copy link
Contributor Author

Mryange commented Nov 8, 2024

run buildall

Copy link
Contributor

@github-actions github-actions bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

clang-tidy made some suggestions

#if defined(__ARM_NEON) && defined(__aarch64__)
#include <arm_neon.h>
#endif

#include "util/sse_util.hpp"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

warning: 'util/sse_util.hpp' file not found [clang-diagnostic-error]

#include "util/sse_util.hpp"
         ^

@doris-robot
Copy link

TeamCity be ut coverage result:
Function Coverage: 36.11% (9415/26071)
Line Coverage: 27.64% (77321/279704)
Region Coverage: 26.36% (39732/150724)
Branch Coverage: 23.19% (20204/87108)
Coverage Report: http://coverage.selectdb-in.cc/coverage/5932ad860a1144244fd415f37e7ecd86298324c3_5932ad860a1144244fd415f37e7ecd86298324c3/report/index.html

@yiguolei yiguolei merged commit b9e5d87 into apache:branch-2.1 Nov 10, 2024
21 of 23 checks passed
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.

3 participants