This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Improve the performance of std::uniform_int_distribution (fewer divisions) [Potential patch]
- From: Daniel Lemire <lemire at gmail dot com>
- To: libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2019 17:11:55 -0400
- Subject: Improve the performance of std::uniform_int_distribution (fewer divisions) [Potential patch]
- Reply-to: lemire at gmail dot com
Even on recent processors, integer division is relatively expensive.
The current implementation of std::uniform_int_distribution typically
requires two divisions by invocation:
// downscaling
const __uctype __uerange = __urange + 1; // __urange can be zero
const __uctype __scaling = __urngrange / __uerange;
const __uctype __past = __uerange * __scaling;
do
__ret = __uctype(__urng()) - __urngmin;
while (__ret >= __past);
__ret /= __scaling;
We can achieve the same algorithmic result with at most one division, and
typically
no division at all without requiring more calls to the random number
generator.
This was recently added to Swift (https://github.com/apple/swift/pull/25286)
The main challenge is that we need to be able to compute the "full"
product. E.g.,
given two 64-bit integers, we want the 128-bit result; given two 32-bit
integers
we want the 64-bit result. This is fast on common processors. The 128-bit
product
is not natively supported in C/C++ but can be achieved with the __uint128_t
extension
which is widely supported by GCC.
For example, if we replace the above code by the following in the case where
__uctype is a 32-bit type, we get a substantial performance boost. E.g., it
can
be twice as fast to sort arrays of 1 million elements (e.g., using the
following
benchmark: https://github.com/lemire/simple_cpp_shuffle_benchmark )
const __uctype __uerange = __urange + 1; // __urange can be zero
uint64_t __product = (__uctype(__urng()) - __urngmin) * __uerange;
uint32_t __lsb = uint32_t(__product);
if(__lsb < __uerange) {
uint64_t __threshold = -__uerange % __uerange;
while (__lsb < __threshold) {
__product = (__uctype(__urng()) - __urngmin) * __uerange;
__lsb = uint32_t(__product);
}
}
I include a potential patch that would bring better performance to
std::uniform_int_distribution at least in some cases.
Reference: Fast Random Integer Generation in an Interval, ACM Transactions
on
Modeling and Computer Simulation 29 (1), 2019
https://arxiv.org/abs/1805.10941
Index: trunk/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/uniform_int_dist.h
===================================================================
--- trunk/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/uniform_int_dist.h (revision 275324)
+++ trunk/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/uniform_int_dist.h (working copy)
@@ -33,6 +33,7 @@
#include <type_traits>
#include <limits>
+#include <cstdint>
namespace std _GLIBCXX_VISIBILITY(default)
{
@@ -242,14 +243,55 @@ _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_VERSION
if (__urngrange > __urange)
{
- // downscaling
- const __uctype __uerange = __urange + 1; // __urange can be zero
- const __uctype __scaling = __urngrange / __uerange;
- const __uctype __past = __uerange * __scaling;
- do
- __ret = __uctype(__urng()) - __urngmin;
- while (__ret >= __past);
- __ret /= __scaling;
+ const __uctype __uerange = __urange + 1; // __urange can be zero
+ if(std::is_same<__uctype, uint64_t>::value and
+ (__urngrange == numeric_limits<uint64_t>::max()) )
+ {
+ // 64-bit case
+ // reference: Fast Random Integer Generation in an Interval
+ // ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation 29 (1), 2019
+ // https://arxiv.org/abs/1805.10941
+ __uint128_t __product = (__uctype(__urng()) - __urngmin) * __uerange;
+ uint64_t __lsb = uint64_t(__product);
+ if(__lsb < __uerange)
+ {
+ uint64_t __threshold = -__uerange % __uerange;
+ while (__lsb < __threshold)
+ {
+ __product = (__uctype(__urng()) - __urngmin) * __uerange;
+ __lsb = uint64_t(__product);
+ }
+ }
+ __ret = __product >> 64;
+ }
+ else if(std::is_same<__uctype, uint32_t>::value
+ and (__urngrange == numeric_limits<uint32_t>::max()) )
+ {
+ // 32-bit case
+ // reference: Fast Random Integer Generation in an Interval
+ // ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation 29 (1), 2019
+ // https://arxiv.org/abs/1805.10941
+ uint64_t __product = (__uctype(__urng()) - __urngmin) * __uerange;
+ uint32_t __lsb = uint32_t(__product);
+ if(__lsb < __uerange) {
+ uint64_t __threshold = -__uerange % __uerange;
+ while (__lsb < __threshold) {
+ __product = (__uctype(__urng()) - __urngmin) * __uerange;
+ __lsb = uint32_t(__product);
+ }
+ }
+ __ret = __product >> 32;
+ }
+ else
+ {
+ // fallback case (2 divisions)
+ const __uctype __scaling = __urngrange / __uerange;
+ const __uctype __past = __uerange * __scaling;
+ do
+ __ret = __uctype(__urng()) - __urngmin;
+ while (__ret >= __past);
+ __ret /= __scaling;
+ }
}
else if (__urngrange < __urange)
{