https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81657
--- Comment #12 from Wilco <wilco at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #10) > (In reply to Wilco from comment #9) > > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #8) > > > That just means r240568 caused another regression. > > > Again, on various targets strchr is efficient, just on a few ones it is > > > not > > > and the change was unfortunately done generically. > > > > On practically all targets, including x64, strchr is not as efficient as > > strlen. > > Do you have data to show that? Yes, on x64 I get these timings for a simple function containing just the library call: size 1024 - 13845 21025 14449 (rawmemchr/memchr/strlen)
