Poor codegen for u64::isqrt()
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Rust
- Stars
- 119k
- Forks
- 16.1k
- PR merge metrics
- PR metrics pending
Description
I tried this code:
fn isqrt(val:u64)->u64{
val.isqrt()
}
I expected to see this happen: rustc generates reasonable code.
Instead, this happened: rustc generates ~150 too many instructions, which takes a while to run.
Potential fix: Use this implementation instead:
fn isqrt(val:u64)->u64{
let estimate = (val as f64).sqrt() as u64;
if val < (1<< 52){//value fits in mantissa, exact precision.
return estimate;
}else{
// Otherwise, do a newton-raphson iteration for the final bits of precision
unsafe{assert_unchecked(estimate!=0);};
return (estimate + val/estimate)/2;
}
}
On my machine, it ran twice as fast.
Meta
rustc --version --verbose:
rustc 1.92.0 (ded5c06cf 2025-12-08)
binary: rustc
commit-hash: ded5c06cf21d2b93bffd5d884aa6e96934ee4234
commit-date: 2025-12-08
host: x86_64-pc-windows-msvc
release: 1.92.0
LLVM version: 21.1.3
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by compiling the provided u64::isqrt() example with the reported rustc 1.92.0 toolchain and inspecting the generated instructions. Trace the rustc code-generation path for this operation and compare its output and runtime with the issue's proposed approach; done means the excess instructions and slowdown are addressed with evidence from a focused benchmark.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- rust
- Domain
- compilers, performance
- Issue type
- Bug
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 38/100