Add deinterleaving function

src/lib.rs

@@ -21,6 +21,7 @@ mod kernels;
 pub mod options;
 pub mod planner;
 mod twiddles;
+mod utils;
 
 macro_rules! impl_fft_for {
     ($func_name:ident, $precision:ty, $planner:ty, $opts_and_plan:ident) => {

src/utils.rs

@@ -0,0 +1,86 @@
+//! Utility functions such as interleave/deinterleave
+
+use std::simd::{prelude::Simd, simd_swizzle, SimdElement};
+
+// We don't multiversion for AVX-512 here and keep the chunk size below AVX-512
+// because we haven't seen any gains from it in benchmarks.
+// This might be due to us running benchmarks on Zen4 which implements AVX-512
+// on top of 256-bit wide execution units.
+//
+// If benchmarks on "real" AVX-512 show improvement on AVX-512
+// without degrading AVX2 machines due to larger chunk size,
+// the AVX-512 specialization should be re-enabled.
+#[multiversion::multiversion(
+    targets(
+    "x86_64+avx2+fma", // x86_64-v3
+    "x86_64+sse4.2", // x86_64-v2
+    "x86+avx2+fma",
+    "x86+sse4.2",
+    "x86+sse2",
+    ))]
+/// Separates data like `[1, 2, 3, 4]` into `([1, 3], [2, 4])` for any length
+pub(crate) fn deinterleave<T: Copy + Default + SimdElement>(input: &[T]) -> (Vec<T>, Vec<T>) {
+    const CHUNK_SIZE: usize = 4;
+    const DOUBLE_CHUNK: usize = CHUNK_SIZE * 2;
+
+    let out_len = input.len() / 2;
+    // We've benchmarked, and it turns out that this approach with zeroed memory
+    // is faster than using uninit memory and bumping the length once in a while!
+    let mut out_odd = vec![T::default(); out_len];
+    let mut out_even = vec![T::default(); out_len];
+
+    input
+        .chunks_exact(DOUBLE_CHUNK)
+        .zip(out_odd.chunks_exact_mut(CHUNK_SIZE))
+        .zip(out_even.chunks_exact_mut(CHUNK_SIZE))
+        .for_each(|((in_chunk, odds), evens)| {
+            let in_simd: Simd<T, DOUBLE_CHUNK> = Simd::from_array(in_chunk.try_into().unwrap());
+            // This generates *slightly* faster code than just assigning values by index.
+            // You'd think simd::deinterleave would be appropriate, but it does something different!
+            let result = simd_swizzle!(in_simd, [0, 2, 4, 6, 1, 3, 5, 7]);
+            let result_arr = result.to_array();
+            odds.copy_from_slice(&result_arr[..CHUNK_SIZE]);
+            evens.copy_from_slice(&result_arr[CHUNK_SIZE..]);
+        });
+
+    // Process the remainder, too small for the vectorized loop
+    let input_rem = input.chunks_exact(DOUBLE_CHUNK).remainder();
+    let odds_rem = out_odd.chunks_exact_mut(CHUNK_SIZE).into_remainder();
+    let evens_rem = out_even.chunks_exact_mut(CHUNK_SIZE).into_remainder();
+    input_rem
+        .chunks_exact(2)
+        .zip(odds_rem.iter_mut())
+        .zip(evens_rem.iter_mut())
+        .for_each(|((inp, odd), even)| {
+            *odd = inp[0];
+            *even = inp[1];
+        });
+
+    (out_odd, out_even)
+}
+
+#[cfg(test)]
+mod tests {
+    use super::deinterleave;
+
+    fn gen_test_vec(len: usize) -> Vec<usize> {
+        (0..len).into_iter().collect()
+    }
+
+    /// Slow but obviously correct implementation of deinterleaving,
+    /// to be used in tests
+    fn deinterleave_naive<T: Copy>(input: &[T]) -> (Vec<T>, Vec<T>) {
+        input.chunks_exact(2).map(|c| (c[0], c[1])).unzip()
+    }
+
+    #[test]
+    fn deinterleaving_correctness() {
+        for len in [0, 1, 2, 3, 15, 16, 17, 127, 128, 129, 130, 135, 100500] {
+            let input = gen_test_vec(len);
+            let (naive_a, naive_b) = deinterleave_naive(&input);
+            let (opt_a, opt_b) = deinterleave(&input);
+            assert_eq!(naive_a, opt_a);
+            assert_eq!(naive_b, opt_b);
+        }
+    }
+}