This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.
Note that libc-hacker is a closed list. You may look at the archives of this list, but subscription and posting are not open.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
Hi! On the ld testcase http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2005-02/msg00375.html the 4 mbsrtowcs calls in fnmatch show quite high on the profiles. For small strings I think we can very well have the luxury of allocating bigger buffers and do just a strnlen instead of one mbsrtowcs call with NULL first argument to compute the size first and then second mbsrtowcs call to do the conversion. With this patch, I get 22% speedup on linking libgklayout.so in en_US.UTF-8 locale. 2005-03-29 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> * posix/fnmatch.c (fnmatch): For short patterns or strings attempt to avoid calling mbsrtowcs twice. --- libc/posix/fnmatch.c.jj 2003-11-19 10:24:00.000000000 +0100 +++ libc/posix/fnmatch.c 2005-03-29 13:53:49.000000000 +0200 @@ -327,31 +327,74 @@ fnmatch (pattern, string, flags) { mbstate_t ps; size_t n; + const char *p; wchar_t *wpattern; wchar_t *wstring; /* Convert the strings into wide characters. */ memset (&ps, '\0', sizeof (ps)); - n = mbsrtowcs (NULL, &pattern, 0, &ps); - if (__builtin_expect (n == (size_t) -1, 0)) - /* Something wrong. - XXX Do we have to set `errno' to something which mbsrtows hasn't - already done? */ - return -1; - wpattern = (wchar_t *) alloca ((n + 1) * sizeof (wchar_t)); - assert (mbsinit (&ps)); - (void) mbsrtowcs (wpattern, &pattern, n + 1, &ps); + p = pattern; +#ifdef _LIBC + n = strnlen (pattern, 1024); +#else + n = strlen (pattern); +#endif + if (__builtin_expect (n < 1024, 1)) + { + wpattern = (wchar_t *) alloca ((n + 1) * sizeof (wchar_t)); + n = mbsrtowcs (wpattern, &p, n + 1, &ps); + if (__builtin_expect (n == (size_t) -1, 0)) + /* Something wrong. + XXX Do we have to set `errno' to something which mbsrtows hasn't + already done? */ + return -1; + if (p) + memset (&ps, '\0', sizeof (ps)); + } + if (__builtin_expect (p != NULL, 0)) + { + n = mbsrtowcs (NULL, &pattern, 0, &ps); + if (__builtin_expect (n == (size_t) -1, 0)) + /* Something wrong. + XXX Do we have to set `errno' to something which mbsrtows hasn't + already done? */ + return -1; + wpattern = (wchar_t *) alloca ((n + 1) * sizeof (wchar_t)); + assert (mbsinit (&ps)); + (void) mbsrtowcs (wpattern, &pattern, n + 1, &ps); + } assert (mbsinit (&ps)); - n = mbsrtowcs (NULL, &string, 0, &ps); - if (__builtin_expect (n == (size_t) -1, 0)) - /* Something wrong. - XXX Do we have to set `errno' to something which mbsrtows hasn't - already done? */ - return -1; - wstring = (wchar_t *) alloca ((n + 1) * sizeof (wchar_t)); - assert (mbsinit (&ps)); - (void) mbsrtowcs (wstring, &string, n + 1, &ps); +#ifdef _LIBC + n = strnlen (string, 1024); +#else + n = strlen (string); +#endif + p = string; + if (__builtin_expect (n < 1024, 1)) + { + wstring = (wchar_t *) alloca ((n + 1) * sizeof (wchar_t)); + n = mbsrtowcs (wstring, &p, n + 1, &ps); + if (__builtin_expect (n == (size_t) -1, 0)) + /* Something wrong. + XXX Do we have to set `errno' to something which mbsrtows hasn't + already done? */ + return -1; + if (p) + memset (&ps, '\0', sizeof (ps)); + } + if (__builtin_expect (p != NULL, 0)) + { + n = mbsrtowcs (NULL, &string, 0, &ps); + if (__builtin_expect (n == (size_t) -1, 0)) + /* Something wrong. + XXX Do we have to set `errno' to something which mbsrtows hasn't + already done? */ + return -1; + wstring = (wchar_t *) alloca ((n + 1) * sizeof (wchar_t)); + assert (mbsinit (&ps)); + (void) mbsrtowcs (wstring, &string, n + 1, &ps); + } return internal_fnwmatch (wpattern, wstring, wstring + n, flags & FNM_PERIOD, flags); Jakub
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |