You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I was not able to find the culprit, but on my machine (24C/32T 13900K) switching from single-threaded to parallel FFT uses multiple CPU cores, but only slightly, resulting in ~3x time reduction, likely with a lot of wasted compute in the process.
I was not able to find the culprit, but on my machine (24C/32T 13900K) switching from single-threaded to parallel FFT uses multiple CPU cores, but only slightly, resulting in ~3x time reduction, likely with a lot of wasted compute in the process.
It would have been nice to leverage CPU cores fully. There is already short-circuiting for parallelism when number of elements on each side is below 256:
https://github.com/sifraitech/rust-kzg/blob/5655cdd039788b1df4d628036fdc705080e000eb/blst-from-scratch/src/fft_fr.rs#L40
Tweaking it either way worsened time for me though.
I think there must be an opportunity for further performance or at very least efficiency improvements.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: