From: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
To: Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de>,
Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>,
Zack Weinberg <zack@codesourcery.com>,
Andreas Jaeger <aj@suse.de>, Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>,
libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com, linux-gcc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: strcmp is too heavy for its everyday usage...
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 00:12:31 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040109081231.GA4218@twiddle.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040109101145.A8801@zzz.ward.six>
On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 10:11:45AM +0500, Denis Zaitsev wrote:
> (r= a[0] - b[0]) &&
> (r= a[1] - b[1]) &&
> (r= a[2] - b[2]) &&
> (r= a[3] - b[3]);
> return r;
> }
>
> It's a typical inline code for compare 4-byte of mem. When it is
> used, say, in such a context
>
> s(a,b) ? A() : B();
>
> GCC discards the value of r perfectly, leaving the only code needed
> for compare bytes for eq/neq. But GCC doesn't merge the 4 byte
> comparing into single word comparing. And, as I understand, it will
> never do that, as it's not asked to. Or this kind of optimization is
> assumed ok for compiler, but just still unimplemented?
Certainly it's ok if it converts.
However, on most targets you'd have to know that a and b are aligned.
Worse, even for targets like x86 that support unaligned loads you have
to know for certain that neither a[3] nor b[3] could possibly segv
when a[0] and b[0] won't. That condition is trivial when a and b are
aligned, but otherwise...
Adding compensation code to deal with the extra conditions that must
be satisfied will probably negate whatever you're hoping to gain here.
r~
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-01-09 8:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-01-08 1:09 strcmp is too heavy for its everyday usage Denis Zaitsev
2004-01-08 1:13 ` Roland McGrath
2004-01-08 1:36 ` Denis Zaitsev
2004-01-08 9:30 ` Andreas Schwab
2004-01-09 5:11 ` Denis Zaitsev
2004-01-09 8:12 ` Richard Henderson [this message]
2004-01-09 8:49 ` Denis Zaitsev
2004-01-14 5:09 ` James Antill
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040109081231.GA4218@twiddle.net \
--to=rth@twiddle.net \
--cc=aj@suse.de \
--cc=libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=linux-gcc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=roland@redhat.com \
--cc=rth@redhat.com \
--cc=schwab@suse.de \
--cc=zack@codesourcery.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.