[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <54d9b379-ba51-b29c-db58-6e305773ee96@st.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2020 11:59:28 +0100
From: Arnaud POULIQUEN <arnaud.pouliquen@...com>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org>,
Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>
CC: Suman Anna <s-anna@...com>,
Fabien DESSENNE <fabien.dessenne@...com>,
<linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com>,
xiang xiao <xiaoxiang781216@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] tty: add rpmsg driver
On 3/26/20 1:01 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Wed, 2020-03-25 at 14:31 +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote:
>> The question was exactly about that: can a compiler optimize it to a
>> bare number or will strlen call remain there?
>
> $ cat str.c
> #include <string.h>
>
> int foo(void)
> {
> return strlen("abc");
> }
>
> $ gcc -c -O2 str.c
> $ objdump -d str.o
> str.o: file format elf64-x86-64
>
>
> Disassembly of section .text:
>
> 0000000000000000 <foo>:
> 0: f3 0f 1e fa endbr64
> 4: b8 03 00 00 00 mov $0x3,%eax
> 9: c3 retq
>
>
same result with arm gcc using -O1 or -Og:
str.o: file format elf32-littlearm
Disassembly of section .text:
00000000 <foo>:
0: e3a00003 mov r0, #3
4: e12fff1e bx lr
So in conclusion replacing sizeof by srlen even if not optimized in -o0, right?
Thanks,
Arnaud
Powered by blists - more mailing lists