Re: [PATCH 1/1] lib: use sunday algorithm to do strstr() and strnstr()

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Sat, Jul 28, 2018 at 10:02:51PM +0800, Zhaoxiu Zeng wrote:
> å 2018/7/27 18:39, Andy Shevchenko åé:
> > On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 8:48 AM, Zhaoxiu Zeng <zengzhaoxiu@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> å 2018/7/27 1:17, Zhaoxiu Zeng åé:
> >>> å 2018/7/23 2:37, Greg Kroah-Hartman åé:
> >>>> 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