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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).