On Tue, 2007-10-23 at 17:12 -0400, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
I don't know if copy-on-write semantics are really useful for current
in-kernel uses, but I've coded and used a C++ string class like this in
the past:
struct string_data
{
int nrefs;
unsigned len;
unsigned capacity;
//char data[capacity]; /* allocated along string_data */
};
struct string /* or typedef in C... */
{
struct string *data;
};
[ struct string_data is a hidden implementation detail, only struct
string is exposed ]
Multiple string objects can share the same data, by increasing the nrefs
count, a new data is allocated if the string is modified and nrefs > 1.
Not having to iterate over the string to calculate it's length,
allocating a larger buffer to eliminate re-allocation and copy-on-write
semantics make a string like this a vast performance improvement over a
normal C string for a minimal (about 3 ints per data buffer) memory
cost.
By using it correctly it can prevents buffer overflows.
You still always null terminate the string stored in data to directly
use it a normal C string.
You also statically allocate an empty string which is shared by all
"uninitialized" or empty strings.
Even without copy-on-write semantics and reference counting, I think
this approach is better because it uses 1 less "object" and allocation:
struct string - "handle" (pointer really) to string data
struct string_data - string data
versus:
struct stringbuf *sb - pointer to string object
struct stringbuf - string object
char *s (member of stringbuf) - string data
Best regards,
- Eric
-
