RE: [PATCH v2 01/71] cocci/rte_memcpy: add script to eliminate fixed size rte_memcpy

2024-03-02 Thread Morten Brørup
+To: x86 maintainers, another bug in rte_memcpy() > From: Stephen Hemminger [mailto:step...@networkplumber.org] > Sent: Saturday, 2 March 2024 18.02 > > On Sat, 2 Mar 2024 12:19:13 +0100 > Mattias Rönnblom wrote: > > > On 2024-03-01 18:14, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > > Rte_memcpy should not be

Re: [PATCH v2 01/71] cocci/rte_memcpy: add script to eliminate fixed size rte_memcpy

2024-03-02 Thread Stephen Hemminger
On Sat, 2 Mar 2024 12:19:13 +0100 Mattias Rönnblom wrote: > On 2024-03-01 18:14, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > Rte_memcpy should not be used for the simple case of copying > > a fix size structure because it is slower and will hide problems > > from code analysis tools. Coverity, fortify and other

Re: [PATCH v2 01/71] cocci/rte_memcpy: add script to eliminate fixed size rte_memcpy

2024-03-02 Thread Mattias Rönnblom
On 2024-03-01 18:14, Stephen Hemminger wrote: Rte_memcpy should not be used for the simple case of copying a fix size structure because it is slower and will hide problems from code analysis tools. Coverity, fortify and other analyzers special case memcpy(). Gcc (and Clang) are smart enough to i

[PATCH v2 01/71] cocci/rte_memcpy: add script to eliminate fixed size rte_memcpy

2024-03-01 Thread Stephen Hemminger
Rte_memcpy should not be used for the simple case of copying a fix size structure because it is slower and will hide problems from code analysis tools. Coverity, fortify and other analyzers special case memcpy(). Gcc (and Clang) are smart enough to inline copies which will be faster. Signed-off-b