On Sat, Jul 28, 2018 at 10:02:51PM +0800, Zhaoxiu Zeng wrote: > 在 2018/7/27 18:39, Andy Shevchenko 写道: > > On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 8:48 AM, Zhaoxiu Zeng <[email protected]> wrote: > >> 在 2018/7/27 1:17, Zhaoxiu Zeng 写道: > >>> 在 2018/7/23 2:37, Greg Kroah-Hartman 写道: > >>>> On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 01:37:15AM +0800, Zhaoxiu Zeng wrote: > > > >>>>> The Sunday algorithm is a variation of Boyer-Moore algorithm, it is > >>>>> easy and fast. > >>>>> For the Sunday algorithm, to see > >>>>> http://www.inf.fh-flensburg.de/lang/algorithmen/pattern/sundayen.htm > >>>> > >>>> So you say, but what does this really buy us? Why make this change? > >>>> How was it tested? What is the downside of not taking this? > > > >>> I use the following program to test on fc28. > >>> Compile with O2, the new version is almost 2X faster than the original. > > > >>> The code size of the original is 0x80, the newer is 0xB0. > > > > So, output of bloat-o-meter would be good to have in commit message. > > > >>> The test result: > > > > Compact performance statistics as well. > > > >>> Thanks! > > > >> The original strnstr might has a bug too! > >> For example, assume s1 is "123\0abc...." and s2 is "abc\0", > >> call strnstr(s1, s2, 7) will return &s1[4], but the correct result is NULL. > > > > If there is a bug, send another patch to fix the bug first. > > > > The bug could be fixed by this patch.
Given that there doesn't seem to be a good reason to take your patch yet, that might be hard :) You need to convince us that the patch is a valid thing to accept, by writing a correct changelog and showing proof of its correctness as this is modifying a core function in the kernel. thanks, greg k-h
