Use memcpy-based peeks and pokes on Microsoft C
I don't have a Windows machine readily available, but according to
https://godbolt.org/z/q4MfjzTPh and the https://imgur.com/UD5a7MF
profile mentioned in #72, this could improve inner loop performance.
Updates #72
diff --git a/internal/cgen/base/fundamental-public.h b/internal/cgen/base/fundamental-public.h
index 4bbebba..f6ea013 100644
--- a/internal/cgen/base/fundamental-public.h
+++ b/internal/cgen/base/fundamental-public.h
@@ -797,6 +797,22 @@
// --------
+// Normally, the wuffs_base__peek_etc and wuffs_base__poke_etc implementations
+// are both (1) correct regardless of CPU endianness and (2) very fast (e.g. an
+// inlined wuffs_base__peek_u32le__no_bounds_check call, in an optimized clang
+// or gcc build, is a single MOV instruction on x86_64).
+//
+// However, the endian-agnostic implementations are slow on Microsoft's C
+// compiler (MSC). Alternative memcpy-based implementations restore speed, but
+// they are only correct on little-endian CPU architectures. Defining
+// WUFFS_BASE__USE_MEMCPY_LE_PEEK_POKE opts in to these implementations.
+//
+// https://godbolt.org/z/q4MfjzTPh
+#if defined(_MSC_VER) && !defined(__clang__) && \
+ (defined(_M_ARM64) || defined(_M_X64))
+#define WUFFS_BASE__USE_MEMCPY_LE_PEEK_POKE
+#endif
+
#define wuffs_base__peek_u8be__no_bounds_check \
wuffs_base__peek_u8__no_bounds_check
#define wuffs_base__peek_u8le__no_bounds_check \
@@ -809,12 +825,24 @@
static inline uint16_t //
wuffs_base__peek_u16be__no_bounds_check(const uint8_t* p) {
+#if defined(WUFFS_BASE__USE_MEMCPY_LE_PEEK_POKE)
+ uint16_t x;
+ memcpy(&x, p, 2);
+ return _byteswap_ushort(x);
+#else
return (uint16_t)(((uint16_t)(p[0]) << 8) | ((uint16_t)(p[1]) << 0));
+#endif
}
static inline uint16_t //
wuffs_base__peek_u16le__no_bounds_check(const uint8_t* p) {
+#if defined(WUFFS_BASE__USE_MEMCPY_LE_PEEK_POKE)
+ uint16_t x;
+ memcpy(&x, p, 2);
+ return x;
+#else
return (uint16_t)(((uint16_t)(p[0]) << 0) | ((uint16_t)(p[1]) << 8));
+#endif
}
static inline uint32_t //
@@ -831,14 +859,26 @@
static inline uint32_t //
wuffs_base__peek_u32be__no_bounds_check(const uint8_t* p) {
+#if defined(WUFFS_BASE__USE_MEMCPY_LE_PEEK_POKE)
+ uint32_t x;
+ memcpy(&x, p, 4);
+ return _byteswap_ulong(x);
+#else
return ((uint32_t)(p[0]) << 24) | ((uint32_t)(p[1]) << 16) |
((uint32_t)(p[2]) << 8) | ((uint32_t)(p[3]) << 0);
+#endif
}
static inline uint32_t //
wuffs_base__peek_u32le__no_bounds_check(const uint8_t* p) {
+#if defined(WUFFS_BASE__USE_MEMCPY_LE_PEEK_POKE)
+ uint32_t x;
+ memcpy(&x, p, 4);
+ return x;
+#else
return ((uint32_t)(p[0]) << 0) | ((uint32_t)(p[1]) << 8) |
((uint32_t)(p[2]) << 16) | ((uint32_t)(p[3]) << 24);
+#endif
}
static inline uint64_t //
@@ -887,18 +927,30 @@
static inline uint64_t //
wuffs_base__peek_u64be__no_bounds_check(const uint8_t* p) {
+#if defined(WUFFS_BASE__USE_MEMCPY_LE_PEEK_POKE)
+ uint64_t x;
+ memcpy(&x, p, 8);
+ return _byteswap_uint64(x);
+#else
return ((uint64_t)(p[0]) << 56) | ((uint64_t)(p[1]) << 48) |
((uint64_t)(p[2]) << 40) | ((uint64_t)(p[3]) << 32) |
((uint64_t)(p[4]) << 24) | ((uint64_t)(p[5]) << 16) |
((uint64_t)(p[6]) << 8) | ((uint64_t)(p[7]) << 0);
+#endif
}
static inline uint64_t //
wuffs_base__peek_u64le__no_bounds_check(const uint8_t* p) {
+#if defined(WUFFS_BASE__USE_MEMCPY_LE_PEEK_POKE)
+ uint64_t x;
+ memcpy(&x, p, 8);
+ return x;
+#else
return ((uint64_t)(p[0]) << 0) | ((uint64_t)(p[1]) << 8) |
((uint64_t)(p[2]) << 16) | ((uint64_t)(p[3]) << 24) |
((uint64_t)(p[4]) << 32) | ((uint64_t)(p[5]) << 40) |
((uint64_t)(p[6]) << 48) | ((uint64_t)(p[7]) << 56);
+#endif
}
// --------
@@ -921,7 +973,8 @@
static inline void //
wuffs_base__poke_u16le__no_bounds_check(uint8_t* p, uint16_t x) {
-#if defined(__GNUC__) && !defined(__clang__) && defined(__x86_64__)
+#if defined(WUFFS_BASE__USE_MEMCPY_LE_PEEK_POKE) || \
+ (defined(__GNUC__) && !defined(__clang__) && defined(__x86_64__))
// This seems to perform better on gcc 10 (but not clang 9). Clang also
// defines "__GNUC__".
memcpy(p, &x, 2);
@@ -955,7 +1008,8 @@
static inline void //
wuffs_base__poke_u32le__no_bounds_check(uint8_t* p, uint32_t x) {
-#if defined(__GNUC__) && !defined(__clang__) && defined(__x86_64__)
+#if defined(WUFFS_BASE__USE_MEMCPY_LE_PEEK_POKE) || \
+ (defined(__GNUC__) && !defined(__clang__) && defined(__x86_64__))
// This seems to perform better on gcc 10 (but not clang 9). Clang also
// defines "__GNUC__".
memcpy(p, &x, 4);
@@ -1041,7 +1095,8 @@
static inline void //
wuffs_base__poke_u64le__no_bounds_check(uint8_t* p, uint64_t x) {
-#if defined(__GNUC__) && !defined(__clang__) && defined(__x86_64__)
+#if defined(WUFFS_BASE__USE_MEMCPY_LE_PEEK_POKE) || \
+ (defined(__GNUC__) && !defined(__clang__) && defined(__x86_64__))
// This seems to perform better on gcc 10 (but not clang 9). Clang also
// defines "__GNUC__".
memcpy(p, &x, 8);
diff --git a/release/c/wuffs-unsupported-snapshot.c b/release/c/wuffs-unsupported-snapshot.c
index 717414f..4b8b3c5 100644
--- a/release/c/wuffs-unsupported-snapshot.c
+++ b/release/c/wuffs-unsupported-snapshot.c
@@ -1064,6 +1064,22 @@
// --------
+// Normally, the wuffs_base__peek_etc and wuffs_base__poke_etc implementations
+// are both (1) correct regardless of CPU endianness and (2) very fast (e.g. an
+// inlined wuffs_base__peek_u32le__no_bounds_check call, in an optimized clang
+// or gcc build, is a single MOV instruction on x86_64).
+//
+// However, the endian-agnostic implementations are slow on Microsoft's C
+// compiler (MSC). Alternative memcpy-based implementations restore speed, but
+// they are only correct on little-endian CPU architectures. Defining
+// WUFFS_BASE__USE_MEMCPY_LE_PEEK_POKE opts in to these implementations.
+//
+// https://godbolt.org/z/q4MfjzTPh
+#if defined(_MSC_VER) && !defined(__clang__) && \
+ (defined(_M_ARM64) || defined(_M_X64))
+#define WUFFS_BASE__USE_MEMCPY_LE_PEEK_POKE
+#endif
+
#define wuffs_base__peek_u8be__no_bounds_check \
wuffs_base__peek_u8__no_bounds_check
#define wuffs_base__peek_u8le__no_bounds_check \
@@ -1076,12 +1092,24 @@
static inline uint16_t //
wuffs_base__peek_u16be__no_bounds_check(const uint8_t* p) {
+#if defined(WUFFS_BASE__USE_MEMCPY_LE_PEEK_POKE)
+ uint16_t x;
+ memcpy(&x, p, 2);
+ return _byteswap_ushort(x);
+#else
return (uint16_t)(((uint16_t)(p[0]) << 8) | ((uint16_t)(p[1]) << 0));
+#endif
}
static inline uint16_t //
wuffs_base__peek_u16le__no_bounds_check(const uint8_t* p) {
+#if defined(WUFFS_BASE__USE_MEMCPY_LE_PEEK_POKE)
+ uint16_t x;
+ memcpy(&x, p, 2);
+ return x;
+#else
return (uint16_t)(((uint16_t)(p[0]) << 0) | ((uint16_t)(p[1]) << 8));
+#endif
}
static inline uint32_t //
@@ -1098,14 +1126,26 @@
static inline uint32_t //
wuffs_base__peek_u32be__no_bounds_check(const uint8_t* p) {
+#if defined(WUFFS_BASE__USE_MEMCPY_LE_PEEK_POKE)
+ uint32_t x;
+ memcpy(&x, p, 4);
+ return _byteswap_ulong(x);
+#else
return ((uint32_t)(p[0]) << 24) | ((uint32_t)(p[1]) << 16) |
((uint32_t)(p[2]) << 8) | ((uint32_t)(p[3]) << 0);
+#endif
}
static inline uint32_t //
wuffs_base__peek_u32le__no_bounds_check(const uint8_t* p) {
+#if defined(WUFFS_BASE__USE_MEMCPY_LE_PEEK_POKE)
+ uint32_t x;
+ memcpy(&x, p, 4);
+ return x;
+#else
return ((uint32_t)(p[0]) << 0) | ((uint32_t)(p[1]) << 8) |
((uint32_t)(p[2]) << 16) | ((uint32_t)(p[3]) << 24);
+#endif
}
static inline uint64_t //
@@ -1154,18 +1194,30 @@
static inline uint64_t //
wuffs_base__peek_u64be__no_bounds_check(const uint8_t* p) {
+#if defined(WUFFS_BASE__USE_MEMCPY_LE_PEEK_POKE)
+ uint64_t x;
+ memcpy(&x, p, 8);
+ return _byteswap_uint64(x);
+#else
return ((uint64_t)(p[0]) << 56) | ((uint64_t)(p[1]) << 48) |
((uint64_t)(p[2]) << 40) | ((uint64_t)(p[3]) << 32) |
((uint64_t)(p[4]) << 24) | ((uint64_t)(p[5]) << 16) |
((uint64_t)(p[6]) << 8) | ((uint64_t)(p[7]) << 0);
+#endif
}
static inline uint64_t //
wuffs_base__peek_u64le__no_bounds_check(const uint8_t* p) {
+#if defined(WUFFS_BASE__USE_MEMCPY_LE_PEEK_POKE)
+ uint64_t x;
+ memcpy(&x, p, 8);
+ return x;
+#else
return ((uint64_t)(p[0]) << 0) | ((uint64_t)(p[1]) << 8) |
((uint64_t)(p[2]) << 16) | ((uint64_t)(p[3]) << 24) |
((uint64_t)(p[4]) << 32) | ((uint64_t)(p[5]) << 40) |
((uint64_t)(p[6]) << 48) | ((uint64_t)(p[7]) << 56);
+#endif
}
// --------
@@ -1188,7 +1240,8 @@
static inline void //
wuffs_base__poke_u16le__no_bounds_check(uint8_t* p, uint16_t x) {
-#if defined(__GNUC__) && !defined(__clang__) && defined(__x86_64__)
+#if defined(WUFFS_BASE__USE_MEMCPY_LE_PEEK_POKE) || \
+ (defined(__GNUC__) && !defined(__clang__) && defined(__x86_64__))
// This seems to perform better on gcc 10 (but not clang 9). Clang also
// defines "__GNUC__".
memcpy(p, &x, 2);
@@ -1222,7 +1275,8 @@
static inline void //
wuffs_base__poke_u32le__no_bounds_check(uint8_t* p, uint32_t x) {
-#if defined(__GNUC__) && !defined(__clang__) && defined(__x86_64__)
+#if defined(WUFFS_BASE__USE_MEMCPY_LE_PEEK_POKE) || \
+ (defined(__GNUC__) && !defined(__clang__) && defined(__x86_64__))
// This seems to perform better on gcc 10 (but not clang 9). Clang also
// defines "__GNUC__".
memcpy(p, &x, 4);
@@ -1308,7 +1362,8 @@
static inline void //
wuffs_base__poke_u64le__no_bounds_check(uint8_t* p, uint64_t x) {
-#if defined(__GNUC__) && !defined(__clang__) && defined(__x86_64__)
+#if defined(WUFFS_BASE__USE_MEMCPY_LE_PEEK_POKE) || \
+ (defined(__GNUC__) && !defined(__clang__) && defined(__x86_64__))
// This seems to perform better on gcc 10 (but not clang 9). Clang also
// defines "__GNUC__".
memcpy(p, &x, 8);
