Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1374316
| From | martin@omnibond.com |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/3] orangefs: strncpy -> strlcpy |
| Date | 2016-04-08 17:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <rlGFQ-60n-19@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <rkjii-dT-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <rkjik-dT-49@gated-at.bofh.it> <rln0u-87S-31@gated-at.bofh.it> <rlo6e-o4-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 2:39 PM, Andy Shevchenko > <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 11:26 PM, Martin Brandenburg <martin@omnibond.com> wrote: > >> From: Martin Brandenburg <martin@omnibond.com> > >> > >> Almost everywhere we use strncpy we should use strlcpy. This affects > >> path names (d_name mostly), symlink targets, and server names. > >> > >> Leave debugfs code as is for now, though it could use a review as well. > >> > > > > |Why not strscpy() as most robust one? Mostly because I hadn't heard about strscpy. On Thu, 7 Apr 2016, Mike Marshall wrote: > It looks like strscpy went in last October... there are > no users of it yet. I was just about to send in a pull request > that includes Martin's strncpy->strlcpy patch when I saw > Andy's comment. > > Linus said when he pulled strscpy: > > > So I'm pulling the strscpy() support because it *is* a better interface. > > But I will refuse to pull mindless conversion patches. Use this in > > places where it makes sense, but don't do trivial patches to fix things > > that aren't actually known to be broken. > > Maybe it makes sense for our strncpy->strlcpy patch to be a strscpy > patch instead? Maybe our strncpy->strlcpy patch is itself a > "mindless conversion patch"? (I don't think so)... There is something broken! If the client-core sends in a string with no NUL terminator, we would blindly copy it into the d_name with strncpy. > > I'll wait until tomorrow, and then send my pull request as it is, unless > everyone chimes in and says "use strscpy!"... > > -Mike After looking over strscpy I don't see a compelling reason not to go ahead and use it while we're fixing up this code. -- Martin
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH 1/3] orangefs: clean up truncate ctime and mtime setting Martin Brandenburg <martin@omnibond.com> - 2016-04-04 22:30 +0200
[PATCH 2/3] orangefs: strncpy -> strlcpy Martin Brandenburg <martin@omnibond.com> - 2016-04-04 22:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/3] orangefs: strncpy -> strlcpy Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> - 2016-04-07 20:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/3] orangefs: strncpy -> strlcpy Mike Marshall <hubcap@omnibond.com> - 2016-04-07 21:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/3] orangefs: strncpy -> strlcpy martin@omnibond.com - 2016-04-08 17:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/3] orangefs: strncpy -> strlcpy Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> - 2016-04-08 18:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/3] orangefs: strncpy -> strlcpy martin@omnibond.com - 2016-04-08 19:20 +0200
[PATCH] orangefs: strncpy -> strscpy Martin Brandenburg <martin@omnibond.com> - 2016-04-08 19:40 +0200
[PATCH 3/3] orangefs: remove unused variable Martin Brandenburg <martin@omnibond.com> - 2016-04-04 22:30 +0200
csiph-web