Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/4] introduce bpf_strncmp() helper
From: Alexei Starovoitov <hidden>
Date: 2021-12-12 01:50:51
Also in:
bpf
From: Alexei Starovoitov <hidden>
Date: 2021-12-12 01:50:51
Also in:
bpf
On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 6:01 AM Hou Tao [off-list ref] wrote:
Hi, The motivation for introducing bpf_strncmp() helper comes from two aspects: (1) clang doesn't always replace strncmp() automatically In tracing program, sometimes we need to using a home-made strncmp() to check whether or not the file name is expected. (2) the performance of home-made strncmp is not so good As shown in the benchmark in patch #4, the performance of bpf_strncmp() helper is 18% or 33% better than home-made strncmp() under x86-64 or arm64 when the compared string length is 64. When the string length grows to 4095, the performance win will be 179% or 600% under x86-64 or arm64. Any comments are welcome. Regards, Tao Change Log: v2: * rebased on bpf-next * drop patch "selftests/bpf: factor out common helpers for benchmarks" (suggested by Andrii) * remove unnecessary inline functions and add comments for programs which will be rejected by verifier in patch 4 (suggested by Andrii) * rename variables used in will-fail programs to clarify the purposes.
Applied. Thanks