From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124])
	by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BAB245C76;
	Mon,  4 Nov 2024 13:11:06 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6848140E41;
	Mon,  4 Nov 2024 13:11:06 +0100 (CET)
Received: from dkmailrelay1.smartsharesystems.com
 (smartserver.smartsharesystems.com [77.243.40.215])
 by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC8D140BA4
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon,  4 Nov 2024 13:11:04 +0100 (CET)
Received: from smartserver.smartsharesystems.com
 (smartserver.smartsharesys.local [192.168.4.10])
 by dkmailrelay1.smartsharesystems.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72A332027D
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon,  4 Nov 2024 13:11:04 +0100 (CET)
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Risk of rte_ether_addr_copy() causing bugs
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2024 13:11:02 +0100
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Message-ID: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35E9F86F@smartserver.smartshare.dk>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: Risk of rte_ether_addr_copy() causing bugs
Thread-Index: Adsusp4ipxURFpKqSnShkSSthoN5Pg==
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Morten_Br=F8rup?= <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
To: <dev@dpdk.org>
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org

Unlike memcpy() and other copy functions, rte_ether_addr_copy() takes =
the destination as the second parameter.

Not following well established conventions adds a high risk of causing =
bugs in the applications/libraries/drivers; it is likely that developers =
expect copy() functions to take parameters in the usual memcpy() order, =
and pass the parameters to rte_ether_addr_copy() in that order instead =
of the reverse order expected by rte_ether_addr_copy().

How can we fix this?

One way would be to introduce a new copy function and mark the old =
function deprecated (due to risk of bugs).
Does the community support such a change?
And what would be a good name for the new function?

Any other ideas for fixing it?


Med venlig hilsen / Kind regards,
-Morten Br=F8rup