linux-kernel - Re: why use memcpy when memmove is there?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0708131611400.29571@fbirervta.pbzchgretzou.qr>
Date:	Mon, 13 Aug 2007 16:15:25 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>
To:	sk malik <srikrishanmalik@...oo.co.in>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: why use memcpy when memmove is there?

On Aug 13 2007 11:55, sk malik wrote:
>Subject: why use memcpy when memmove is there?

>memcpy copies a part of memory to some other location
>but It will not work for all cases of overlapping
>blocks.(if the start of destination block falls
>between the source block)
>
>while memove copes with overlapping areas.
>
>then why is memcpy present in the sources can't we
>simply do
>
>"#define memcpy memmove" in include/linux/string.h
>
>or am I missing something?

memmove must copy with overlapping memory segments, while memcpy does not, and
can therefore use a different optimization strategy. But that would have been
apparent if you had looked at the code.

	Jan
-- 
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/