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

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20180728143838.GC3681@kroah.com>
Date:   Sat, 28 Jul 2018 16:38:38 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Zhaoxiu Zeng <zengzhaoxiu@....com>
Cc:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@...rosoft.com>,
        Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Zhaoxiu Zeng <zhaoxiu.zeng@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] lib: use sunday algorithm to do strstr() and
 strnstr()

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