Re: [PATCH v2] Improve performance of strstr
Eric Blake <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lib.newlib |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 10/3/18 11:06 AM, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: > Eric Blake wrote: > >> Passing the glibc testsuite isn't all that reassuring, as they just >> barely had to squash a strstr bug this year that was not caught by their >> testsuite at the time: > > It's better than nothing given newlib doesn't have any testsuite at all... > Do you know of a proper test for strstr by any chance? Nothing that was written from the grounds of code coverage, but between the glibc test, the gnulib test [1] (which was also recently enhanced to catch the glibc failure), and your testing (if you want to make that public), we're probably doing fairly well. A testsuite written for 100% coverage as determined by gcov, or performed by a fuzzer that aims to get to the same results, might be even more reassuring; but I'm not asking you to tackle that. I'm just pointing out that a passing test does not always imply a passing implementation, if the test was not written with exact knowledge of every possible branch in the code. [1] https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/gnulib.git/tree/tests/test-strstr.c -- Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. +1-919-301-3266 Virtualization: qemu.org | libvirt.org