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: [GLIBC][PATCH v2] Remove strdup inlines

From: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>
To: Wilco Dijkstra <Wilco dot Dijkstra at arm dot com>, Zack Weinberg <zackw at panix dot com>
Cc: "libc-alpha at sourceware dot org" <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, nd <nd at arm dot com>
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 16:00:12 +0100
Subject: Re: [GLIBC][PATCH v2] Remove strdup inlines
Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
References: <AM5PR0802MB26104922C496F25DABAFC47283980@AM5PR0802MB2610.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <CAKCAbMh4uqH+7XLA4iRKohu_JPCKCJjxm0G+sDjVayxSgXxWXg@mail.gmail.com> <AM5PR0802MB2610771B31B5E13D39AFB89483980@AM5PR0802MB2610.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>

On 12/12/2016 02:02 PM, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:

Remove the str(n)dup inlines from string/bits/string2.h.  Although inlining
calls with constant strings shows a small (~10%) performance gain, strdup is
typically used in error reporting code, so not performance critical.


Where do the performance gains come from?

Is it from IFUNC selection for strlen and memcpy, which does not happenin libc.so?

I don't think it's true that strdup is mostly used for error reporting.Why do you think so?


Thanks,
Florian

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [GLIBC][PATCH v2] Remove strdup inlines
  - From: Wilco Dijkstra

References:
- [GLIBC][PATCH] Remove strdup inlines
  - From: Wilco Dijkstra
- Re: [GLIBC][PATCH] Remove strdup inlines
  - From: Zack Weinberg
- Re: [GLIBC][PATCH v2] Remove strdup inlines
  - From: Wilco Dijkstra

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