Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43C19C61DA4 for ; Thu, 2 Feb 2023 15:40:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231185AbjBBPkd (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Feb 2023 10:40:33 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:36836 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232949AbjBBPkW (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Feb 2023 10:40:22 -0500 Received: from mga05.intel.com (mga05.intel.com [192.55.52.43]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB92F23C7D for ; Thu, 2 Feb 2023 07:39:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1675352398; x=1706888398; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:mime-version; bh=tklnhT8GNmJ7trqLgHdVnPc2VC3uRP06uBquwx2Tfng=; b=QVYyER+IaWmCVYGeJJ6qZnDRvjwzo0OqSS0s1Ml6hd9/c6lqHvLDCxWX tC5Hmuz1Ln8+P3oMAB+R/sonw2G+wcp/UwIcpNy/kX8BWsFOSETUBI4Nr Z+dcrUp/oYpKse1MD0K3IhbHaoWTLxhfB4hrzD3cCg8GTGYu1TMkfdEUR +mN2VmClbu30xkTwtk1CYz5Z4AApqhHM+PX6LATodjdkl7b96A9uS/L83 g+lMK7tjxVXPJ2IGJkQat1/xRBo/df8pVy13AA/RWyKZUYe/paks89Jg7 hBQek524wYGMo3nakMsPGgvPFTYbHHY0i82AK3Fvr4Rfq54gIcnIBpuOn Q==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10608"; a="414681206" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.97,267,1669104000"; d="scan'208";a="414681206" Received: from orsmga005.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.41]) by fmsmga105.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 02 Feb 2023 07:34:19 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10608"; a="839247590" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.97,267,1669104000"; d="scan'208";a="839247590" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.54]) by orsmga005.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 02 Feb 2023 07:34:17 -0800 Received: from andy by smile.fi.intel.com with local (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1pNbbM-001EgL-0Q; Thu, 02 Feb 2023 17:34:16 +0200 Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2023 17:34:15 +0200 From: Andy Shevchenko To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Rasmus Villemoes , Kees Cook Subject: memchr() vs. memscan() Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Why do we have memchr() and memscan() implementations in lib/string.c? As far as I can see the one may be derived from the other easily. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko