Re: refactor architecture-specific popcount code

From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: John Naylor <johncnaylorls(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Greg Burd <greg(at)burd(dot)me>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: refactor architecture-specific popcount code
Date: 2026-02-10 18:45:35
Message-ID: aYt8zx3IcSHktp0R@nathan
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Feb 07, 2026 at 03:54:31PM +0700, John Naylor wrote:
> Okay, this is looking good. I have just one more suggestion: For 0002,
> just copy the word-wise functions verbatim. That way, it's a pure
> refactoring commit and the exception doesn't need explaining. With
> that, I'd say go ahead and commit 0001/2.

Seems reasonable. Here is an updated patch set. I've also swapped 0003
and 0004.

> Then after a bit more research, the final form of the inline functions
> can be visible in a single commit. I've tested S390X already and hope
> to test one other platform.

Thanks. Looking forward to the results.

--
nathan

Attachment Content-Type Size
v12-0001-Remove-some-unnecessary-optimizations-in-popcoun.patch text/plain 5.5 KB
v12-0002-Remove-specialized-word-length-popcount-implemen.patch text/plain 10.9 KB
v12-0003-Remove-uses-of-popcount-builtins.patch text/plain 6.3 KB
v12-0004-Make-use-of-pg_popcount-in-more-places.patch text/plain 3.0 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bertrand Drouvot 2026-02-10 19:15:27 Re: PGPROC alignment (was Re: pgsql: Separate RecoveryConflictReasons from procsignals)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2026-02-10 18:34:37 Re: Instability in postgres_fdw regression tests