On 2/24/21 12:53 AM, Nick Connolly wrote:
>
>> Allocating memory using rte_strdup() I'd use rte_free()
>> to release it. I guess it will fail badly.
>> So, I think that a different, more specific prefix is
>> required for POSIX wrappers.
>
> Andrew: my understanding of Bruce's proposal is that th
Allocating memory using rte_strdup() I'd use rte_free()
to release it. I guess it will fail badly.
So, I think that a different, more specific prefix is
required for POSIX wrappers.
Andrew: my understanding of Bruce's proposal is that the strdup() name
will now be kept (in this case through
On 2/21/21 5:28 PM, Dmitry Kozlyuk wrote:
> POSIX strncasecmp(), strdup(), and strtok_r() have different names
> on Windows, respectively, strnicmp(), _strdup(), and strtok_s().
>
> Add wrappers as inline functions, because they're used from librte_kvargs,
> and thus cannot be in librte_eal; besid
POSIX strncasecmp(), strdup(), and strtok_r() have different names
on Windows, respectively, strnicmp(), _strdup(), and strtok_s().
Add wrappers as inline functions, because they're used from librte_kvargs,
and thus cannot be in librte_eal; besides, implementation is trivial.
Signed-off-by: Dmitr
4 matches
Mail list logo
