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: [PATCH] Faster strchr implementation.


And could you please explain what metrics you use to calculate the
numbers. How do you calculate "average" ratio?

Time ratio to fastest:
strcmp_new: 106.992815% strcmp_new_alt: 100.000000% __strcmp_sse2:
126.005391% strcmp_sse42: 120.079076% __strcmp_ssse3: 123.927262%

Thanks.

--
Liubov Dmitrieva


On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Liubov Dmitrieva
<liubov.dmitrieva@gmail.com> wrote:
> That was about strcmp, not memcmp. Do you also need results for memcmp
> on Haswell, Silvermont and Atom?
>
>
> --
> Liubov
>
> On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 4:20 PM, OndÅej BÃlka <neleai@seznam.cz> wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 03:27:01PM +0400, Liubov Dmitrieva wrote:
>>>
>> To fix that use this
>> http://kam.mff.cuni.cz/~ondra/benchmark_string/memcmp_profile120913.tar.bz2
>> or increase number of tests in tests/rand.c. Benchmark above differs by
>> changing line
>> for(i=0;i<100000;i++){
>> to
>> for(i=0;i<300000;i++){
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> paradigm shift...without a clutch


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