Subject: Re: Performance of various memcpy()'s
To: None <email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: TAMURA Kent <email@example.com>
Date: 10/29/2002 12:47:49
In message "Re: Performance of various memcpy()'s"
on 02/10/29, Bang Jun-Young <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> That check is only compiled in if _DIAGNOSTIC is defined at compile
> time. Obviously it has nothing to do with protecting system from
Right. It has no effect without _DIAGNOSTIC.
> Unless %ecx is a negative, %edi and %esi are always larger than 12(%esp)
> and 16(%esp), respectively. Calling assert is even more strange;
Please imagine that src (or dst) is 0x12345678 and length (%ecx)
is 0xffffffff. Copying over the end of the address space is
always meaningless in NetBSD, and may crash the program or may
> "src + length > src" string is passed to assert on dst check, and
> "dst + length > dst" on src check.
Oops, it is a typo.
TAMURA Kent <kent2002@hauN.org> <email@example.com>