On Thu, Jan 08, 2026 at 06:00:21PM +0800, Feng Jiang wrote: > On 2026/1/8 15:26, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 08, 2026 at 02:53:58PM +0800, Feng Jiang wrote: > >> On 2026/1/7 19:56, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > >>> On Wed, Jan 7, 2026 at 4:35 AM Feng Jiang <[email protected]> wrote:
... > >>>> Add a KUnit test for strnlen() to verify correctness across > >>>> different string lengths and memory alignments. > >>> > >>> Same comment as per patch 1 (it would probably require to call for > >>> arch_strnlen() or something like this). > >> > >> Thanks, makes sense. > >> > >> I'll add the performance benchmarking (random filling + timing) in V2. > >> > >> Since string functions are typically exported directly by each architecture > >> without an arch_ prefix, I'll introduce a generic_strnlen() (based on > >> lib/string.c) within the test for comparison. > > > > Probably you want to make the existing one to have that name and use it > > inside > > the test and in the fallback wrapper. We don't want to have duplicate code, > > it > > is bad from maintenance perspective. > > Thanks for the suggestions! > > To avoid code duplication, I'll rename the generic implementation in > lib/string.c > to __generic_strnlen() and keep the original strnlen() as a wrapper. Then > I'll use > the generic one in the KUnit test for comparison. > > Does this approach look good to you? To me, yes. To others, we will know later on when you send a new version. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
