<html> <head> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=windows-1255"> <meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Exchange Server"> <style></style> </head> <body> <div> <div dir="auto">Thanks for the clarification. <div dir="auto">We are okay to move forward with the revert.</div> </div> <div class="x_gmail_extra"><br> <div class="x_gmail_quote">בתאריך 16 בספט׳ 2024 18:12,‏ Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org> כתב:<br type="attribution"> </div> </div> </div> <font size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt;"> <div class="PlainText">CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the content is safe.<br> <br> <br> <br> On Mon, 16 Sep 2024 06:33:26 +0000<br> "Brandes, Shai" <shaibran@amazon.com> wrote:<br> <br> > > Did you have any chance to check/test this patch?<br> > [Brandes, Shai] We are currently conducting tests and will provide an update shortly. In the meantime, could you advise whether it is recommended to entirely avoid using rte_memcpy in our driver, considering we have direct calls to it?<br> <br> There is a long term goal to remove rte_memcpy(). It exists only as workaround for<br> cases where older compilers do not produce optimium code.<br> <br> When rte_memcpy() is used the checks done by fortify, gcc, coverity etc are<br> less and there is higher probability of bugs going undetected.<br> <br> My current recommendation is to only use rte_memcpy() in the data path and for<br> variable size data items.<br> </div> </span></font> </body> </html>