From: Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org>
To: Wilco Dijkstra <Wilco.Dijkstra@arm.com>,
'GNU C Library' <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
Cc: nd <nd@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Improve string benchtests
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2019 17:33:33 -0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1dc12364-668c-0216-a569-295a0c1f394f@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DB5PR08MB1030BB52717C28E0134E5154836E0@DB5PR08MB1030.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
On 05/02/2019 13:17, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
> Hi Adhemerval,
>
>> Space after cast. As a side note, this won't evaluate wstpcpy as-is, since it
>> will use an optimized version and it will result in a wrong generic name for
>> wcscpy.
>
> I'll have a look at that. Maybe we could create GENERIC_STPCPY from
> concatenation of the STPCPY define. I want to avoid huge amounts of defines
> leading to completely incomprehensible magic.
>
>> And as a following cleanup for wcpcpy we can use the similar code for strcpy
>> adjusting for wide-chars:
>
> Sure, there are lots of generic string functions which aren't optimized yet. However
> that's a different patch... This patch simply makes it easy to find those cases.
The idea was not make is a pre-requisite, but rather an idea for a different
patch indeed.
>
>> Same as before for wcpncpy: instead of reimplement the generic implementation
>> on benchtests we can just include them. And it also leads to an possible
>> optimization on generic implementation for wcpncpy.
>
> The point is to enable useful comparisons of string implementations. If we include
> the generic implementation then we just compare the generic implementation with
> itself in many cases. And that isn't useful. If I change a generic implementation I
> want to see the difference that makes in the benchmark comparison rather than
> showing no difference.
My understanding is we have the generic implementation as the baseline
where arch-specific optimization might be applied and the idea of the
comparison is to check against it. I see no point in using a different
implementation on benchtests, it should compare against exactly what
glibc is currently providing.
If you want to check if the your changes improves the generic, you can
compare against multiples glibc builds.
>
> Maybe the name generic_xxx is confusing? It's meant to be the baseline,
> something which you should beat in all cases with the actual implementation.
My understanding is the baseline should be the generic implementation which
is selected if the architecture does not provide an optimized one.
>
> Cheers,
> Wilco
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-05 19:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-12-27 18:26 [PATCH] Improve string benchtests Wilco Dijkstra
2019-02-01 15:36 ` Wilco Dijkstra
2019-02-04 19:35 ` Adhemerval Zanella
2019-02-05 15:17 ` Wilco Dijkstra
2019-02-05 19:33 ` Adhemerval Zanella [this message]
2019-02-06 14:01 ` Wilco Dijkstra
2019-02-06 14:53 ` Adhemerval Zanella
2019-03-06 18:14 ` Wilco Dijkstra
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
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/involved.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1dc12364-668c-0216-a569-295a0c1f394f@linaro.org \
--to=adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org \
--cc=Wilco.Dijkstra@arm.com \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=nd@arm.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 read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).