From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11502 invoked by alias); 14 Sep 2010 18:37:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 8186 invoked by uid 48); 14 Sep 2010 18:36:53 -0000 Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 18:37:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20100914183653.8185.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "rth at gcc dot gnu dot org" To: glibc-bugs@sources.redhat.com In-Reply-To: <20100914154213.12019.eblake@redhat.com> References: <20100914154213.12019.eblake@redhat.com> Reply-To: sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug libc/12019] memchr overshoots on Alpha X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC Mailing-List: contact glibc-bugs-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: glibc-bugs-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-09/txt/msg00062.txt.bz2 ------- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-14 18:36 ------- Created an attachment (id=4980) --> (http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=4980&action=view) Proposed alpha re-implementation I came up with this re-write last year when the Debian people pinged me about this problem. But I never heard back from the guy that was supposed to test it on real hardware. >>From the ifdef alpha bit at the top you can see that I could validate the algorithm from an x64 native host, but that isn't really good enough. -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12019 ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.