Hi TF-Mers,

There are several versions of mem* API set in the system.

At the very beginning, the whole secure firmware was put in the library model, and it is expected to be self-contained -- at least at the source level as the first step. Hence a 'tfm_mem*' API set is created for secure firmware usage. The same reason for involving 'spm_mem*' in the PSA compliance model.

When we designed HAL for SPM, we noticed that SPM HAL actually run in the same domain as SPM, hence we encouraged developers to use 'spm_mem*' in SPM HAL.

This brings a bit of difficulty, especially when the platform sources are shared for multiple targets, while other targets do not have 'spm_mem*' API.

As 'mem*' is actually common enough (as they are fundamental API of libc), hence redefine the name is applicable only a system is highly self-contained. In our case, using 'mem*' API can bring much convenience. Hence I am thinking to let sources other than SPM use 'mem*' API, they are platform, partitions and runtime libraries. For SPM sources (under secure_fw/spm), a source-level 'spm_mem*' is kept, to keep the possibility to make SPM itself really self-contained. Now it is only source-level because 'spm_mem*' is actually forwarded to 'mem*'.

I am creating a patch to change this, and want to know your opinion.

Thanks.

/Ken