From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3ED45C282C2 for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2019 22:53:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00FAB21721 for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2019 22:53:42 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="eF1shcfi" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726731AbfBGWxl (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Feb 2019 17:53:41 -0500 Received: from mail-it1-f196.google.com ([209.85.166.196]:54355 "EHLO mail-it1-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726622AbfBGWxl (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Feb 2019 17:53:41 -0500 Received: by mail-it1-f196.google.com with SMTP id i145so4256195ita.4 for ; Thu, 07 Feb 2019 14:53:41 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=MYV5RRghKDNDtEgNNj81rn84qUpuDTq5YPvgHRoEwfk=; b=eF1shcfiy4erSmDZQwCE6uVHBBgvx6YgJ0Q7Ute2h6Z8Fp/d7jv8+cW2oRDAbergNH 4R7YuAgMtRtDVqcntUYfzeHpiyMXijD0f2/7EBVlLz7QfYO7Tn3em5B7yY63/WdOPOpK 4UPsUf4HTfASkI0M8xbxlVtP1b2AOZRmu6QPEx5hP11665c2MVl9mOYJyFHEtD/g1FTb CXIrOQenzG2o+D2GJi7i8JVsmeV2KFy02A2H4je2JaNpMGm7V0fK4w9l5ic0EAphxZM5 s3rM3TTN66Ww8r1ome4iAt9gfpouAc9wtaEYQCZiygTGfRSgpiAUbt95f+Zd0yn2u3bL tnFg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=MYV5RRghKDNDtEgNNj81rn84qUpuDTq5YPvgHRoEwfk=; b=R+vVoiP98m+VKXFq2MbDsLI+xnz7EO6RDUJlSA3qf9qDz7vVZwoNsUENTRZyTkERXi DbjznLclX+hSuO4kbNIPlTbYhDC2GkN0CK71x0RLuXRzTzmduCrr5P7igbuwItmusLfH 25wGft5kzpP0vp19WdK7+aV6WTZe0AoTSQSh6J3ldG6MSQa9i/UbpmHYgYI7THAt9iph rvjA/wyWjOYJiqyCIqw3auhryvnTMkx2ChKW60/7fR3HF7HRMj6NmcyyId0pW4+/peUR is+W1+QgLylK/NZmws7o7zkHF9Cm9I3GG5BU118E8+u1Snr5eiHREgBH3RC7cPDbaBtp +yfw== X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuZKZ867V+jztk4rn4PNGK/mF0iZSPFYzN2sihApxp5eKkO5YuoH oHE2zouh8ItBaf2LyCvmu6o1IbgQDfV/mGjJhi4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IaaoCQhppa9OWpPOELVwVDQxewG95Iv68f72YiJtewsbCZ5gOJIrpYiESq2XhubAxA6PLAmhakJvw7Jsrs6cS8= X-Received: by 2002:a02:8561:: with SMTP id g88mr9587608jai.68.1549580020731; Thu, 07 Feb 2019 14:53:40 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190206222110.GA19527@ls3530.dellerweb.de> In-Reply-To: From: Matt Turner Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2019 14:53:29 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] parisc: Add assembly implementations for strlen, strcpy, strncpy and strcat To: Helge Deller Cc: linux-parisc , James Bottomley , John David Anglin Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-parisc-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 2:22 PM Helge Deller wrote: > > > On 07.02.19 18:46, Matt Turner wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 2:21 PM Helge Deller wrote: > >> > >> Add performance-optimized versions of the strlen, strcpy, strncpy and > >> strcat string functions. > > > > Can you say anything else about them? > > No. > > > E.g., are you using some feature that the compiler isn't able to > > generate? > > Some assembler instructions are used which the compiler doesn't > use by default for such use cases. > > > Do you have performance data? > > Not yet. > Maybe someone wants to do that? > > > Except for strlen, they look like straightforward translations of the > > simple C implementations. > > The code is much smaller than what the compiler generates and > the layout of the bytes-stores are targetted the behaviour of > the parisc 64bit CPUs. So is that the rationale? I'm not sure how anyone can offer review if they don't know what you're trying to accomplish.