This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Ping: [PATCH v4] faster strlen on x64


On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 02:59:17PM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 2:15 PM, OndÅej BÃlka <neleai@seznam.cz> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 01:43:09PM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >> On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 11:42 PM, OndÅej BÃlka <neleai@seznam.cz> wrote:
> >> > On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 10:29:49AM -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> >> >> On 03/15/2013 07:49 AM, OndÅej BÃlka wrote:
> >> >> > On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 09:24:07AM -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> >> >> >> On 03/11/2013 05:15 AM, OndÅej BÃlka wrote:
> >> >> >>> Carlos, what is you opinion?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> The patch looks good. I have one last question though.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> We remove some interesting code in the existing strlen implementations
> >> >> >> that ensure that strlen calls from libc itself do not go through the PLT.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Have you verified that after your changes there are no testsuite regressions
> >> >> >> in the plt check test or that the internal calls to strlen avoid the PLT?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> OK to checkin after this additional validation with posted result.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I ran http://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Testing/Check-localplt
> >> >> > elf/checklocalplt.out is empty. I guess this means no regressions.
> >> >>
> >> >> Correct.
> >> >>
> >> >> Cheers,
> >> >> Carlos.
> >> >
> >> > Commited with obvious resolution of merge conflict in
> >> > sysdeps/x86-64/multiarch/Makefile.
> >>
> >> This commit:
> >>
> >> commit 37bb363f03d75e5e6f2ca45f2c686a3a0167797e
> >> Author: Ondrej Bilka <neleai@seznam.cz>
> >> Date:   Mon Mar 18 07:39:12 2013 +0100
> >>
> >>     Faster strlen on x64.
> >>
> >>  sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/Makefile                |   6 +-
> >>  sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/ifunc-impl-list.c       |  13 -
> >>  sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/strcat-sse2-unaligned.S | 232 +++++++-
> >>  sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/strcat-ssse3.S          | 316 ++++++++++-
> >>  sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/strlen-sse2-no-bsf.S    | 685 -----------------------
> >>  sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/strlen-sse2-pminub.S    | 259 ---------
> >>  sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/strlen-sse4.S           |  84 ---
> >>  sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/strlen.S                |  68 ---
> >>  sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/strnlen-sse2-no-bsf.S   |   3 -
> >>  sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/strnlen.S               |  57 --
> >>  sysdeps/x86_64/strcat.S                          |   1 +
> >>  sysdeps/x86_64/strlen.S                          | 272 ++++++---
> >>  sysdeps/x86_64/strnlen.S                         |  67 +--
> >>
> >> has no ChangeLog entries.  Since it removed sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/strlen.S,
> >> sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/rtld-strlen.S became unnecessary and should also
> >> be removed.
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> H.J.
> > A changelog entry is here. You cannot remove
> > sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/rtld-strlen.S as we cannot now use sse2 in
> > rtld. I had patch that removed that restriction, when I return back on
> > it and it will be commited then it could be removed.
> 
> When sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/rtld-strlen.S is removed,
> sysdeps/x86_64/rtld-strlen.S is used.
> 
Yes then its ok.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]