On 8/14/07, arshad hussain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
> > 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?
I don't know but memcpy generates better asm code AFAIK.
Essentially memove is nothing but
int memmove(void *dest, void *src, size_t n)
{
//some checks
//some adjustments to src and destination as they may overlap as per
//definition.
memcpy(dest, src, n);
}
thanks
> >
> > Regards
> > Sri--
> > SK Malik
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send an email with
> > "unsubscribe kernelnewbies" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Please read the FAQ at http://kernelnewbies.org/FAQ
> >
> >
>
> Hi Sri,
>
> My guess ...
> 1. fitness of purpose,
> 2. memcpy _MAY_ be faster than memmove
>
> Thank You
>
>
--
play the game
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send an email with
"unsubscribe kernelnewbies" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://kernelnewbies.org/FAQ
