library size?

[lulcat]

Hi, this is just a question.. I been using a static lib with the C sources from 1.5.2 which here clocks out at 80kB ,
whereas 1.5.4 just released is clocking in 94kB, 14kB wow, that's a big addition? What has changed? I see avx512 instructions to be the main culprit I suppose. what does 1.5.4 do better for this size increase?

I use avx512 but I don't think I see much perf differences to justify such a big size increase? Of course it's relative, I'm not fussed on the desktop but technically, this is rather large in embedded scenarios. 18%ish size increase..

[oconnor663]

It's the optimized XOF implementation: #418

In theory the input and output sides could share the same kernel (at least in the assembly versions, not too sure about intrinsics), but right now the kernel is duplicated. @sneves what do you think the long term prospects there?

[BurningEnlightenment]

this is rather large in embedded scenarios.

Embedded scenarios with a x86_64 cpu? 🤨 However, I suppose one could offer an additional switch for AVX-512 given its low prevalance.

[lulcat]

Ye good point Burning. For the record.. I didn't mean to make this like "Oh gosh" more than just wanted to point out a notiecable difference in the library size, as this can be a thing. I just don't know where I could point it out beyond here, in 'issues' :)

[oconnor663]

Totally reasonable!

[sneves]

@sneves what do you think the long term prospects there?

The AVX-512 kernels can (and will) be reduced to 1/3-1/2 their current size with minimal performance impact. Sharing actual routines between them might be doable but I'm not sure it's that much of a win.
The other kernels may also be reducible but I'm less sure about the performance impact.