Re: [HACKERS] Do we need the gcc feature "__builtin_expect" topromote the branches prediction? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Do we need the gcc feature "__builtin_expect" topromote the branches prediction?
Date
Msg-id 20170602153217.edi2xdvzck42sgcu@alap3.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to [HACKERS] Do we need the gcc feature "__builtin_expect" to promote the branches prediction?  (Hao Lee <mixtrue@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Do we need the gcc feature "__builtin_expect" topromote the branches prediction?  (Hao Lee <mixtrue@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

On 2017-06-02 16:40:56 +0800, Hao Lee wrote:
> Hi all,
>        There is a lot of "if statement" in system, and GCC provides a
> feature,"__builtin_expect", which  let compilers know which branch is
> mostly run. as we known, miss-prediction will lead the performance
> lost(because the CPU will thrown away some instructions, and re-fetch some
> new instructions). so that we can tell GCC how produce more efficient code.
> for example as following.
> It will gain performance promotion i think. As i know, the in Linux kernel,
> this feature is also applied already.
> 
>  #define likely(cond)     __builtin_expect(cond,true)
> #define unlikely(cond)  __builtin_expect(cond,false)
> 
> if (likely(cond)) {
> //most likely run.
>    xxxx
> } else //otherwise.
> {
>    xxxx
> }

We already do this in a few cases, that are performance critical enough
to matter.  But in most cases the CPUs branch predictor does a good
enough job on its own.

- Andres



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GSOC 17] Eliminate O(N^2) scaling fromrw-conflict tracking in serializable transactions
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] relocation truncated to fit: citus build failure on s390x