Re: [PATCH] memchr (trivial) optimization

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Jan Engelhardt
Date: Friday, August 24, 2007 - 5:54 am

On Aug 23 2007 19:13, Matt Mackall wrote:

Uhm, you have two "e"s in there.


Or do it glibc-style

void *memchr(const void *s, unsigned char c, size_t n)
{
	...
	for (; p + 3 < e; p += 4) {
		if (c == p[0])
			return (void *)&p[0];
		if (c == p[1])
			return (void *)&p[1];
		if (c == p[2])
			return (void *)&p[2];
		if (c == p[3])
			return (void *)&p[3];
	}
	... /* check the rest */
}


	Jan
-- 
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCH] memchr (trivial) optimization, lode leroy, (Wed Aug 22, 2:34 am)
Re: [PATCH] memchr (trivial) optimization, Andi Kleen, (Wed Aug 22, 3:56 am)
Re: [PATCH] memchr (trivial) optimization, Ingo Oeser, (Wed Aug 22, 5:13 pm)
Re: [PATCH] memchr (trivial) optimization, Matt Mackall, (Thu Aug 23, 5:13 pm)
Re: [PATCH] memchr (trivial) optimization, Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Thu Aug 23, 6:03 pm)
Re: [PATCH] memchr (trivial) optimization, Matt Mackall, (Thu Aug 23, 7:19 pm)
Re: [PATCH] memchr (trivial) optimization, Jan Engelhardt, (Fri Aug 24, 5:54 am)
Re: [PATCH] memchr (trivial) optimization, Matt Mackall, (Fri Aug 24, 8:57 am)