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 7B2F546201;
	Wed, 12 Feb 2025 10:09:31 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3632C410FB;
	Wed, 12 Feb 2025 10:09:31 +0100 (CET)
Received: from dkmailrelay1.smartsharesystems.com
 (smartserver.smartsharesystems.com [77.243.40.215])
 by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62D5340269
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 12 Feb 2025 10:09:29 +0100 (CET)
Received: from smartserver.smartsharesystems.com
 (smartserver.smartsharesys.local [192.168.4.10])
 by dkmailrelay1.smartsharesystems.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BFAD2076B;
 Wed, 12 Feb 2025 10:09:29 +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: RE: [PATCH v5 01/11] eal: introduce new secure memory fill
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2025 10:09:27 +0100
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Message-ID: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35E9FA26@smartserver.smartshare.dk>
In-Reply-To: <20250211173720.1188517-2-stephen@networkplumber.org>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: [PATCH v5 01/11] eal: introduce new secure memory fill
Thread-Index: Adt8q6caz7MEuepsTR+nuNkMofai2gAgOyzw
References: <20241114011129.451243-1-stephen@networkplumber.org>
 <20250211173720.1188517-1-stephen@networkplumber.org>
 <20250211173720.1188517-2-stephen@networkplumber.org>
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Morten_Br=F8rup?= <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
To: "Stephen Hemminger" <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
	<dev@dpdk.org>
Cc: "Tyler Retzlaff" <roretzla@linux.microsoft.com>
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

> From: Stephen Hemminger [mailto:stephen@networkplumber.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, 11 February 2025 18.35
>=20
> When memset() is used before a release function such as free,
> the compiler if allowed to optimize the memset away under
> the as-if rules. This is normally ok, but in certain cases such
> as passwords or security keys it is problematic.
>=20
> Introduce a DPDK wrapper which is equivalent to the C++ memset_s
> function.  Naming chosen to be similar to kernel.

It's not like C11 memset_s, which takes one more parameter, and is an =
optional part of the C11 standard.
It's like C23 memset_explicit.

Wouldn't it be better to name it after the C standard function, i.e. =
rte_memset_explicit?

Or maybe backport memset_explicit from C23, i.e. omit the rte_ prefix, =
if not using a C23 compiler?