[PATCH v2] Improve performance of strstr

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Oct  3 11:44, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 10/3/18 11:06 AM, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
> > Eric Blake wrote:
> > 
> > > Passing the glibc testsuite isn't all that reassuring, as they just
> > > barely had to squash a strstr bug this year that was not caught by their
> > > testsuite at the time:
> > 
> > It's better than nothing given newlib doesn't have any testsuite at all...
> > Do you know of a proper test for strstr by any chance?
> 
> Nothing that was written from the grounds of code coverage, but between the
> glibc test, the gnulib test [1] (which was also recently enhanced to catch
> the glibc failure), and your testing (if you want to make that public),
> we're probably doing fairly well.  A testsuite written for 100% coverage as
> determined by gcov, or performed by a fuzzer that aims to get to the same
> results, might be even more reassuring; but I'm not asking you to tackle
> that.  I'm just pointing out that a passing test does not always imply a
> passing implementation, if the test was not written with exact knowledge of
> every possible branch in the code.
> 
> [1] https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/gnulib.git/tree/tests/test-strstr.c

Anybody going to run this test?


Thanks,
Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen
Cygwin Maintainer
Red Hat
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://sourceware.org/pipermail/newlib/attachments/20181010/e7ceb66e/attachment.sig>