Am 23.05.2011 23:55, schrieb Wolfgang Denk:
Dear Alexander Holler,
In message4DDACC8B.6090507@ahsoftware.de you wrote:
--- a/lib/string.c +++ b/lib/string.c @@ -467,6 +467,9 @@ void * memcpy(void *dest, const void *src, size_t count) unsigned long *dl = (unsigned long *)dest, *sl = (unsigned long *)src; char *d8, *s8;
- if (src == dest)
return dest;here is the same, as in the patch I've commented before. There exist no reason to add a check for identity to memcpy() because memcpy doesn't support overlapping regions (and identity is just a special case of overlapping regions). If something might call memcpy() with overlapping or identical regions, it should use memmove().
In an ideal world, nobody will ever use any interfces in a non-compliant or incorrect way.
In reality, all kind of errors happen. A little defensive programming like the one above helps a lot, so please stop complaining even if you think you don't need this.
So you I will look forward to checks for NULL pointers and similiar in all C standard functions implemented in u-boot to circumvent tons of possible real world bugs in all callers of strcpy, strlen, mem* and whatever.
Reads promising,
regards,
Alexander