speed of unbalanced multiplication
nisse at lysator.liu.se
Thu Feb 7 10:29:36 CET 2013
bodrato at mail.dm.unipi.it writes:
> After the patch, only changing the way tune/speed allocate memory for the
> operands, their results are comparable:
I don't understand the details, like the align parameter to the
> If other developers does not dislike the changed meaning of the .<r>
> parameter to mpn_mul, this patch can be applied to the main repo...
Makes sense to me to have the r parameter give the size of the smaller
operand. Are there any drawbacks?
But if we change the meaning of r, maybe it would make sense to
interpret it as follows:
if r <= size, it's the size of the smaller operand (what your change
if r > size, its the size of the *product*, so do size limbs by (r -
That would make it a bit more convenient to measure how smooth the
performance is for unbalanced multiplications.
Niels Möller. PGP-encrypted email is preferred. Keyid C0B98E26.
Internet email is subject to wholesale government surveillance.
More information about the gmp-devel