On Fri, 2017-07-14 at 20:21 +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On Fri, 2017-07-14 at 21:21 +0200, Martin Wilck wrote: > > > > Let's have a strncpy vs. strlcpy discussion :D ! > > > > I can do this if you insist, but I don't see a big benefit. We've > > tested with the patch I submitted. > > My comments were not intended as an invitation to open a strncpy() > vs. strlcpy() > discussion. What I wanted to illustrate with the above patch is that > when using > strlcpy() it is not necessary to explicitly zero-terminate a string > because > strlcpy() guarantees zero-termination. Compact code that is as > readable as more > verbose code is always better because compact code is easier to > verify. OK. I'll wait for comments on the other patches, and change v2 of this patch to your version. Martin -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
