I've fixed ep_strndup <-> se_stnrdup, patch attached. >From subjective testings, it seems that there is some measurable performance improvement - 5-10 percent on my test pcap file (~ you are not just avoiding a strncmp(), but also the char-by-char search for the space that follows the method (as well as another strncmp() for 'M-', which is a rare case as well). The optimization, while not the cleanest coding-wise, works well because it works for the most common cases - and I believe many, many times (subjectively > 90%) of the times it'll hit the optimized path. Nevertheless, it is important for me that it'll be understood - so I documented it inline clearly - I think.
On Nov 8, 2007 2:12 AM, Stephen Fisher < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 05, 2007 at 09:15:45AM +0200, Kaul wrote: > > > Somewhat inspired by the performance improvements to tvbuff, I've made > > some small performance improvements to packet-http.c: > > > 1. In the most common cases 'GET ', 'POST', 'HTTP' - compare them > > against the 32bit value of those strings, instead of strncmp(). I > > reckon in most cases it'll be used, and there won't be need for longer > > comparison paths. > > Is this a significant enough performance improvement to warrant making > the code a bit harder to read, maintain and understand? The strncmp() > function, at least in a recent FreeBSD libc, looks pretty quick and > simple as it is. I am just wondering; I do not mean to discourage you > from you from contributing. > > > Steve > > _______________________________________________ > Wireshark-dev mailing list > Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org > http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev >
_______________________________________________ Wireshark-dev mailing list Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
