[Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.0.4 release

David Cournapeau david@ar.media.kyoto-u.ac...
Fri Oct 19 00:33:09 CDT 2007

Travis E. Oliphant wrote:
> I've finally caught up with the discussion on aligned allocators for 
> NumPy.   In general I'm favorable to the idea, although it is not as 
> easy to implement in 1.0.X because of the need to possibly change the C-API.
> The Python solution is workable and would just require a function call 
> on the Python side (which one could call from the C-side as well with 
> little difficulty, I believe Chuck Harris already suggested such a 
> function).   So, I think at least the Python functions are an easy 
> addition for 1.0.4 (along with simple tests for alignment --- although 
> a.ctypes.data % 16 is pretty simple and probably doesn't warrant a new 
> function)
> I'm a bit more resistant to the more involved C-code in the patch 
> provided with #568, because of the requested new additions to the C-API, 
> but I understand the need.   I'm currently also thinking heavily about 
> using SIMD intrinsics in ufunc inner loops but will not likely get those 
> in before 1.0.4.   Unfortunately, all ufuncs that take advantage of SIMD 
> instructions will have to handle the unaligned portions which may occur 
> even if the start of the array is aligned, so the problem of thinking 
> about alignment does not go away there with a simplified function call.
I don't know anything about the ufunc machinery yet, but I guess you 
need to know the alignement of a given buffer, right ? This can be done 

Actually, one problem I encountered (If I remember correctly) was that 
there is no pure C library facility in numpy: by that, I mean a simple C 
library, independant of python, which could be reusable by C code using 
numpy. For example, if we want to start thinking about using SIMD, I 
think it would be good to support basics in a pure C library.

I don't see any downside to this approach ?
> A simple addition is an NPY_ALIGNED_16 and NPY_ALIGNED_32 flag for the 
> PyArray_From_Any that could adjust the data-pointer as needed to get at 
> least those kinds of alignment.
> We can't change the C-API for PyArray_FromAny to accept an alignment 
> flag, and I'm pretty loath to do that even for 1.1.
> Is there a consensus?  What do others think of the patch in ticket 
> #568?  Is there a need to add general-purpose aligned memory allocators 
> to NumPy without a corresponding array_allocator? 
Having the NPY_ALIGNED_* flags would already be enough for most cases 
(for SIMD, you rarely, if ever needs more than 32 bytes alignment 
AFAIK). Those flags + general purposes memory allocators (in a C support 
library) would be enough to do everything we need to fft, for example.



More information about the Numpy-discussion mailing list