Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 2 Jan 2002 19:10:21 -0700 | From | Tom Rini <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] C undefined behavior fix |
| |
On Thu, Jan 03, 2002 at 12:35:30AM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote: > > (cc list trimmed) > > alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk said: > > If you want a strcpy that isnt strcpy then change its name or use a > > different language 8) > > The former is not necessarily sufficient in this case. You've still done the > broken pointer arithmetic, so even if the function isn't called strcpy() the > compiler is _still_ entitled to replace it with a call to memcpy() or even > machine_restart() before sleeping with your mother and starting WW III. > > Granted, it probably _won't_ do any of those today, but you should know > better than to rely on that. > > What part of 'undefined behaviour' is so difficult for people to understand?
I think it comes down to an expectation that if the behaviour is undefined, anything _could_ happen, but what should happen is that it should just be passed along to (in this case) strcpy un-modified. Anything _could_ happen, but why do something that probably won't help all the same?
But this is moot anyhow since I _think_ Paul's suggestion of doing RELOC and friends as asm will work (and echo'd by rth?).
-- Tom Rini (TR1265) http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |