I don't think you're going to get a compiler to auto-vectorize as well as you can do by hand with Intel's intrinsics. (err, as well as I can do by hand anyway :P).
Possibly once we manually vectorize it, we can see how to hand-hold a compiler with scalar code that works that way, but we really need packed-compare into a 0/0xFF with byte elements, and it's hard to write something in C that compilers will auto-vectorize well. The default integer promotions mean that most C expressions actually produce 32-bit results, even when you use uint8_t, and that often tricks compilers into unpacking 8-bit to 32-bit elements, costing a lot of shuffles on top of the automatic factor of 4 throughput loss (fewer elements per register), like in @harold's small tweak to your source.
SSE/AVX (before AVX512) has signed comparisons for SIMD integer, not unsigned. But you can range-shift things to signed -128..127 by subtracting 128. XOR (add-without-carry) is slightly more efficient on some CPUs, so you actually just XOR with 0x80 to flip the high bit. But mathematically you're subtracting 128 from a 0..255 unsigned value, giving a -128..127 signed value.
It's even still possible to implement the "unsigned compare trick" of (x-min) < (max-min). (For example, detecting alphabetic ASCII characters). As a bonus, we can bake the range-shift into that subtract. If x<min, it wraps around and becomes a large value greater than max-min. This obviously works for unsigned, but it does in fact work (with a range-shifted max-min) with SSE/AVX2 signed-compare instructions. (A previous version of this answer claimed this trick only worked if max-min < 128, but that's not the case. x-min can't wrap all the way around and become lower than max-min, or get into that range if it started above max).
An earlier version of this answer had code that made the range exclusive, i.e. not including the ends, so you even redmin=0 / redmax=255 would exclude pixels with red=0 or red=255. But I solved that by comparing the other way (thanks to ideas from @Nejc's and @chtz's answers).
@chtz's idea of using a saturating add/sub instead of a compare is very cool. If you arrange things so saturation means in-range, it works for an inclusive range. (And you can set the Alpha component to a known value by choosing a min/max that makes all 256 possible inputs in-range). This lets us avoid range-shifting to signed, because unsigned-saturation is available
We can combine the sub/cmp range-check with the saturation trick to do sub (wraps on out-of-bounds low) / subs (only reaches zero if the first sub didn't wrap). Then we don't need an andnot or or to combine two separate checks on each component; we already have a 0 / non-zero result in one vector.
So it only takes two operations to give us a 32-bit value for the whole pixel that we can check. Iff all 3 RGB components are in-range, that element will have a specific value. (Because we've arranged for the Alpha component to already give a known value, too). If any of the 3 components are out-of-range, it will have some other value.
If you do this the other way, so saturation means out-of-range, then you have an exclusive range in that direction, because you can't choose a limit such that no value reaches 0 or reaches 255. You can always saturate the alpha component to give yourself a known value there, regardless of what it means for the RGB components. An exclusive range would let you abuse this function to be always-false by choosing a range that no pixel could ever match. (Or if there's a third condition, besides per-component min/max, then maybe you want an override).
The obvious thing would be to use a packed-compare instruction with 32-bit element size (_mm256_cmpeq_epi32 / vpcmpeqd) to generate a 0xFF or 0x00 (which we can apply / blend into the original RGB pixel value) for in/out of range.
// AVX2 core idea: wrapping-compare trick with saturation to achieve unsigned compare
__m256i tmp = _mm256_sub_epi8(src, min_values); // wraps to high unsigned if below min
__m256i RGB_inrange = _mm256_subs_epu8(tmp, max_minus_min); // unsigned saturation to 0 means in-range
__m256i new_alpha = _mm256_cmpeq_epi32(RGB_inrange, _mm256_setzero_si256());
// then blend the high byte of each element with RGB from the src vector
__m256i alpha_replaced = _mm256_blendv_epi8(new_alpha, src, _mm256_set1_epi32(0x00FFFFFF)); // alpha from new_alpha, RGB from src
Note that an SSE2 version would only need one MOVDQA instructions to copy src; the same register is the destination for every instruction.
Also note that you could saturate the other direction: add then adds (with (256-max) and (256-(min-max)), I think) to saturate to 0xFF for in-range. This could be useful with AVX512BW if you use zero-masking with a fixed mask (e.g. for alpha) or variable mask (for some other condition) to exclude a component based on some other condition. AVX512BW zero-masking for the sub/subs version would consider components in-range even when they aren't, which could also be useful.
But extending that to AVX512 requires a different approach: AVX512 compares produce a bit-mask (in a mask register), not a vector, so we can't turn around and use the high byte of each 32-bit compare result separately.
Instead of cmpeq_epi32, we can produce the value we want in the high byte of each pixel using carry/borrow from a subtract, which propagates left to right.
0x00000000 - 1 = 0xFFFFFFFF # high byte = 0xFF = new alpha
0x00?????? - 1 = 0x00?????? # high byte = 0x00 = new alpha
Where ?????? has at least one non-zero bit, so it's a 32-bit number >=0 and <=0x00FFFFFFFF
Remember we choose an alpha range that makes the high byte always zero
i.e. _mm256_sub_epi32(RGB_inrange, _mm_set1_epi32(1)). We only need the high byte of each 32-bit element to have the alpha value we want, because we use a byte-blend to merge it with the source RGB values. For AVX512, this avoids a VPMOVM2D zmm1, k1 instruction to convert a compare result back into a vector of 0/-1, or (much more expensive) to interleave each mask bit with 3 zeros to use it for a byte-blend.
This sub instead of cmp has a minor advantage even for AVX2: sub_epi32 runs on more ports on Skylake (p0/p1/p5 vs. p0/p1 for pcmpgt/pcmpeq). On all other CPUs, vector integer add/sub run on the same ports as vector integer compare. (Agner Fog's instruction tables).
Also, if you compile _mm256_cmpeq_epi32() with -march=native on a CPU with AVX512, or otherwise enable AVX512 and then compile normal AVX2 intrinsics, some compilers will stupidly use AVX512 compare-into-mask and then expand back to a vector instead of just using the VEX-coded vpcmpeqd. Thus, we use sub instead of cmp even for the _mm256 intrinsics version, because I already spent the time to figure it out and show that it's at least as efficient in the normal case of compiling for regular AVX2. (Although _mm256_setzero_si256() is cheaper than set1(1); vpxor can zero a register cheaply instead of loading a constant, but this setup happens outside the loop.)
#include <immintrin.h>
#ifdef __AVX2__
// inclusive min and max
__m256i setAlphaFromRangeCheck_AVX2(__m256i src, __m256i mins, __m256i max_minus_min)
{
__m256i tmp = _mm256_sub_epi8(src, mins); // out-of-range wraps to a high signed value
// (x-min) <= (max-min) equivalent to:
// (x-min) - (max-min) saturates to zero
__m256i RGB_inrange = _mm256_subs_epu8(tmp, max_minus_min);
// 0x00000000 for in-range pixels, 0x00?????? (some higher value) otherwise
// this has minor advantages over compare against zero, see full comments on Godbolt
__m256i new_alpha = _mm256_sub_epi32(RGB_inrange, _mm256_set1_epi32(1));
// 0x00000000 - 1 = 0xFFFFFFFF
// 0x00?????? - 1 = 0x00?????? high byte = new alpha value
const __m256i RGB_mask = _mm256_set1_epi32(0x00FFFFFF); // blend mask
// without AVX512, the only byte-granularity blend is a 2-uop variable-blend with a control register
// On Ryzen, it's only 1c latency, so probably 1 uop that can only run on one port. (1c throughput).
// For 256-bit, that's 2 uops of course.
__m256i alpha_replaced = _mm256_blendv_epi8(new_alpha, src, RGB_mask); // RGB from src, 0/FF from new_alpha
return alpha_replaced;
}
#endif // __AVX2__
Set up vector args for this function and loop over your array with _mm256_load_si256 / _mm256_store_si256. (Or loadu/storeu if you can't guarantee alignment.)
This compiles very efficiently (Godbolt Compiler explorer) with gcc, clang, and MSVC. (AVX2 version on Godbolt is good, AVX512 and SSE versions are still a mess, not all the tricks applied to them yet.)
;; MSVC's inner loop from a caller that loops over an array with it:
;; see the Godbolt link
$LL4@:
vmovdqu ymm3, YMMWORD PTR [rdx+rax*4]
vpsubb ymm0, ymm3, ymm7
vpsubusb ymm1, ymm0, ymm6
vpsubd ymm2, ymm1, ymm5
vpblendvb ymm3, ymm2, ymm3, ymm4
vmovdqu YMMWORD PTR [rcx+rax*4], ymm3
add eax, 8
cmp eax, r8d
jb SHORT $LL4@
So MSVC managed to hoist the constant setup after inlining. We get similar loops from gcc/clang.
The loop has 4 vector ALU instructions, one of which takes 2 uops. Total 5 vector ALU uops. But total fused-domain uops on Haswell/Skylake = 9 with no unrolling, so with luck this can run at 32 bytes (1 vector) per 2.25 clock cycles. It could come close to actually achieving that with data hot in L1d or L2 cache, but L3 or memory would be a bottleneck. With unrolling, it could maybe bottlenck on L2 cache bandwidth.
An AVX512 version (also included in the Godbolt link), only needs 1 uop to blend, and could run faster in vectors per cycle, thus more than twice as fast using 512-byte vectors.
