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/