Re: generic strncpy - off-by-one error
From: Timothy Miller
Date: Mon Aug 18 2003 - 10:58:48 EST
Peter Kjellerstedt wrote:
For loops 2.867568 5.620561 8.128734 28.286289
Multi byte fill 2.868031 5.670782 6.312027 11.336015
And here are the numbers for my P4:
For loops 3.060262 5.927378 8.796814 30.659818
Multi byte fill 3.126607 5.898459 7.096685 13.135379
So there is no doubt that the multi byte version is a clear
winner (which was expected, I suppose).
Cool! Hey, is this just an exercise, or are we actually going to use
this? I would be very happy to have something I contributed to put into
the kernel. :)
Here is the code that I used:
char *strncpy(char *dest, const char *src, size_t count)
{
char *tmp = dest;
while (count && *src) {
*tmp++ = *src++;
count--;
}
if (count) {
Good idea... bad to do so many checks if count is zero. On the other
hand, if count is rarely zero, then it's a loss. Maybe benchmark with
and without?
size_t count2;
while (count & (sizeof(long) - 1)) {
*tmp++ = '\0';
count--;
}
count2 = count / sizeof(long);
I know that a good compiler should migrate code to help the CPU
pipeline, but how about moving this "count2 = " line up to before the
first fill loop. See if that helps any. Always good to precompute well
in advance.
while (count2) {
*((long *)tmp)++ = '\0';
count2--;
}
count &= (sizeof(long) - 1);
And move this to before the middle fill loop.
while (count) {
*tmp++ = '\0';
count--;
}
}
return dest;
}
//Peter
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/