70,004
社区成员
发帖
与我相关
我的任务
分享分析strlen源码中遇到的问题
贴源码：
glibc 2.7
[/code]
glibc 2.7
#include <string.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#undef strlen
/* Return the length of the null-terminated string STR. Scan for
the null terminator quickly by testing four bytes at a time. */
size_t
strlen (str)
const char *str;
{
const char *char_ptr;
const unsigned long int *longword_ptr;
unsigned long int longword, magic_bits, himagic, lomagic;
/* Handle the first few characters by reading one character at a time.
Do this until CHAR_PTR is aligned on a longword boundary. */
for (char_ptr = str; ((unsigned long int) char_ptr
& (sizeof (longword) - 1)) != 0;
++char_ptr)
if (*char_ptr == '\0')
return char_ptr - str;
/* All these elucidatory comments refer to 4-byte longwords,
but the theory applies equally well to 8-byte longwords. */
longword_ptr = (unsigned long int *) char_ptr;
/* Bits 31, 24, 16, and 8 of this number are zero. Call these bits
the "holes." Note that there is a hole just to the left of
each byte, with an extra at the end:
bits: 01111110 11111110 11111110 11111111
bytes: AAAAAAAA BBBBBBBB CCCCCCCC DDDDDDDD
The 1-bits make sure that carries propagate to the next 0-bit.
The 0-bits provide holes for carries to fall into. */
magic_bits = 0x7efefeffL;
himagic = 0x80808080L;
lomagic = 0x01010101L;
if (sizeof (longword) > 4)
{
/* 64-bit version of the magic. */
/* Do the shift in two steps to avoid a warning if long has 32 bits. */
magic_bits = ((0x7efefefeL << 16) << 16) | 0xfefefeffL;
himagic = ((himagic << 16) << 16) | himagic;
lomagic = ((lomagic << 16) << 16) | lomagic;
}
if (sizeof (longword) > 8)
abort ();
/* Instead of the traditional loop which tests each character,
we will test a longword at a time. The tricky part is testing
if *any of the four* bytes in the longword in question are zero. */
for (;;)
{
/* We tentatively exit the loop if adding MAGIC_BITS to
LONGWORD fails to change any of the hole bits of LONGWORD.
1) Is this safe? Will it catch all the zero bytes?
Suppose there is a byte with all zeros. Any carry bits
propagating from its left will fall into the hole at its
least significant bit and stop. Since there will be no
carry from its most significant bit, the LSB of the
byte to the left will be unchanged, and the zero will be
detected.
2) Is this worthwhile? Will it ignore everything except
zero bytes? Suppose every byte of LONGWORD has a bit set
somewhere. There will be a carry into bit 8. If bit 8
is set, this will carry into bit 16. If bit 8 is clear,
one of bits 9-15 must be set, so there will be a carry
into bit 16. Similarly, there will be a carry into bit
24. If one of bits 24-30 is set, there will be a carry
into bit 31, so all of the hole bits will be changed.
The one misfire occurs when bits 24-30 are clear and bit
31 is set; in this case, the hole at bit 31 is not
changed. If we had access to the processor carry flag,
we could close this loophole by putting the fourth hole
at bit 32!
So it ignores everything except 128's, when they're aligned
properly. */
longword = *longword_ptr++;
if (
#if 0
/* Add MAGIC_BITS to LONGWORD. */
(((longword + magic_bits)
/* Set those bits that were unchanged by the addition. */
^ ~longword)
/* Look at only the hole bits. If any of the hole bits
are unchanged, most likely one of the bytes was a
zero. */
& ~magic_bits)
#else
((longword - lomagic) & himagic)
#endif
!= 0)
{
/* Which of the bytes was the zero? If none of them were, it was
a misfire; continue the search. */
const char *cp = (const char *) (longword_ptr - 1);
if (cp[0] == 0)
return cp - str;
if (cp[1] == 0)
return cp - str + 1;
if (cp[2] == 0)
return cp - str + 2;
if (cp[3] == 0)
return cp - str + 3;
if (sizeof (longword) > 4)
{
if (cp[4] == 0)
return cp - str + 4;
if (cp[5] == 0)
return cp - str + 5;
if (cp[6] == 0)
return cp - str + 6;
if (cp[7] == 0)
return cp - str + 7;
}
}
}
}
libc_hidden_builtin_def (strlen)
glibc 2.16
[code=C/C++]
#include <string.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#undef strlen
/* Return the length of the null-terminated string STR. Scan for
the null terminator quickly by testing four bytes at a time. */
size_t
strlen (str)
const char *str;
{
const char *char_ptr;
const unsigned long int *longword_ptr;
unsigned long int longword, himagic, lomagic;
/* Handle the first few characters by reading one character at a time.
Do this until CHAR_PTR is aligned on a longword boundary. */
for (char_ptr = str; ((unsigned long int) char_ptr
& (sizeof (longword) - 1)) != 0;
++char_ptr)
if (*char_ptr == '\0')
return char_ptr - str;
/* All these elucidatory comments refer to 4-byte longwords,
but the theory applies equally well to 8-byte longwords. */
longword_ptr = (unsigned long int *) char_ptr;
/* Bits 31, 24, 16, and 8 of this number are zero. Call these bits
the "holes." Note that there is a hole just to the left of
each byte, with an extra at the end:
bits: 01111110 11111110 11111110 11111111
bytes: AAAAAAAA BBBBBBBB CCCCCCCC DDDDDDDD
The 1-bits make sure that carries propagate to the next 0-bit.
The 0-bits provide holes for carries to fall into. */
himagic = 0x80808080L;
lomagic = 0x01010101L;
if (sizeof (longword) > 4)
{
/* 64-bit version of the magic. */
/* Do the shift in two steps to avoid a warning if long has 32 bits. */
himagic = ((himagic << 16) << 16) | himagic;
lomagic = ((lomagic << 16) << 16) | lomagic;
}
if (sizeof (longword) > 8)
abort ();
/* Instead of the traditional loop which tests each character,
we will test a longword at a time. The tricky part is testing
if *any of the four* bytes in the longword in question are zero. */
for (;;)
{
longword = *longword_ptr++;
if (((longword - lomagic) & ~longword & himagic) != 0)
{
/* Which of the bytes was the zero? If none of them were, it was
a misfire; continue the search. */
const char *cp = (const char *) (longword_ptr - 1);
if (cp[0] == 0)
return cp - str;
if (cp[1] == 0)
return cp - str + 1;
if (cp[2] == 0)
return cp - str + 2;
if (cp[3] == 0)
return cp - str + 3;
if (sizeof (longword) > 4)
{
if (cp[4] == 0)
return cp - str + 4;
if (cp[5] == 0)
return cp - str + 5;
if (cp[6] == 0)
return cp - str + 6;
if (cp[7] == 0)
return cp - str + 7;
}
}
}
}
libc_hidden_builtin_def (strlen)
请问if (((longword - lomagic) & himagic) != 0) 和 if (((longword - lomagic) & ~longword & himagic) != 0)这两种写法的区别是什么呢？ 真心求教
[/code]
...全文
请发表友善的回复…
发表回复
astrotycoon 2012-10-30
- 打赏
- 举报
[Quote=引用 2 楼 的回复:]
楼主好雅致，有闲情研究这个；
[/Quote]
汗，其实看看还是有收获的！
楼主好雅致，有闲情研究这个；
[/Quote]
汗，其实看看还是有收获的！
liuliufen 2012-10-30
- 打赏
- 举报
楼主好雅致，有闲情研究这个；
OenAuth.Core 2012-10-30
- 打赏
- 举报
从代码上看是为了防止溢出出现0xFFFFFFFF这种情况吧
