<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic I already have some code in Intel® Integrated Performance Primitives</title>
    <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/Platform-Aware-Functions-overhead/m-p/1065818#M24352</link>
    <description>I already have some code using 32 bit functions I'd rather not update at the moment. I'm thinking of using_L functions for new code.</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:40:30 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>BMart1</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2017-03-27T23:40:30Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Platform-Aware Functions overhead</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/Platform-Aware-Functions-overhead/m-p/1065816#M24350</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Are _L variants slower? Will I get code bloat if I mix _L and normal variants of the same function? Or are both functions implemented only once underneath?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Mar 2017 19:28:32 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/Platform-Aware-Functions-overhead/m-p/1065816#M24350</guid>
      <dc:creator>BMart1</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-03-24T19:28:32Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Hi Bruno,</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/Platform-Aware-Functions-overhead/m-p/1065817#M24351</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi Bruno,&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;The performance of platform-aware functions with _L variant should be comparable with the none _L functions for compatible systems. _L functions can &lt;SPAN style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102); font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;"&gt;overcome 32-bit size limitations. Can you explain why you'd use the same function with both variants? This link&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://software.intel.com/en-us/node/684662"&gt;https://software.intel.com/en-us/node/684662&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;provides more information.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:31:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/Platform-Aware-Functions-overhead/m-p/1065817#M24351</guid>
      <dc:creator>Shaojuan_Z_Intel</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-03-27T23:31:24Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>I already have some code</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/Platform-Aware-Functions-overhead/m-p/1065818#M24352</link>
      <description>I already have some code using 32 bit functions I'd rather not update at the moment. I'm thinking of using_L functions for new code.</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:40:30 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/Platform-Aware-Functions-overhead/m-p/1065818#M24352</guid>
      <dc:creator>BMart1</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-03-27T23:40:30Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

