Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 12:45:51 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 12:45:51 -0400 Received: from neon-gw-l3.transmeta.com ([63.209.4.196]:44298 "EHLO neon-gw.transmeta.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 12:45:50 -0400 Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 09:56:44 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds To: Jakub Jelinek cc: Rusty Russell , Daniel Jacobowitz , , , Keith Owens , , Subject: Re: [TRIVIAL] strlen("literal string") -> (sizeof("literal string")-1) In-Reply-To: <20020829031008.T7920@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 800 Lines: 20 On Thu, 29 Aug 2002, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > Well, IMHO at least for the more recent GCC versions kernel > should leave the job to GCC (ie. either just prototype str* functions, > or define them to __builtin_str* variants). I agree. That x86 strlen() inline is from 1991 with fixes ever after, and pre-dates gcc having any support for inline at all. We're much more likely to be better off just removing it these days. Is somebody willing to compare code quality? I wouldn't be in the least surprised if gcc did a better job these days.. Linus - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/