On Sun, Oct 05, 2014 at 06:01:43PM +0200, Rickard Strandqvist wrote:
> Hi
>
> Yes, it can be faster, even if it is as you say, probably a difference
> depending on the size of the count.
> And even greater need to test this on a variety of hardware :-/
Most architectures (the notable exception is
Hi
Yes, it can be faster, even if it is as you say, probably a difference
depending on the size of the count.
And even greater need to test this on a variety of hardware :-/
But I try to do my test with the memset variant to.
Kind regards
Rickard Strandqvist
2014-10-05 17:36 GMT+02:00 Joe Perc
On Sun, 2014-10-05 at 15:29 +0200, Rickard Strandqvist wrote:
> This variant is in my tests about 7-10% faster, and also think
> it is perhaps even clearer code than before.
[]
> diff --git a/lib/string.c b/lib/string.c
[]
> @@ -123,12 +123,12 @@ char *strncpy(char *dest, const char *src, size_t co
This variant is in my tests about 7-10% faster, and I also think
it is perhaps even clearer code than before.
I assume that more will do the testing, I do not know if we should do tests
on different types of hardware as well, my test was on a new Intel I7.
Rickard Strandqvist (1):
lib: string.c
This variant is in my tests about 7-10% faster, and also think
it is perhaps even clearer code than before.
Signed-off-by: Rickard Strandqvist
---
lib/string.c | 12 ++--
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/string.c b/lib/string.c
index f3c6ff5..6961229 10
5 matches
Mail list logo
