From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Roman V. Shaposhnick" To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] how to avoid a memset() optimization Message-ID: <20021114044645.B11748@unicorn.math.spbu.ru> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 04:46:45 +0300 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 1e1acb32-eacb-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 08:47:41PM -0500, Russ Cox wrote: > > You're right here, but for me defining secmemset is much bigger evil > > than just adding volatile to the buffer. > > Why? Because dropping volatile creates more problems in subsequent code. Inexperienced maintainer might add some new code and end it with a call to memset() [ he is inexperienced and doesn't know about secmemset yet ] and he will trip over without buffer being volatile. For me this is worse. Thanks, Roman.