On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 11:04:38AM +0200, Sandro Volery wrote: > > > > On 11 Sep 2019, at 10:52, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 08:23:59AM +0200, Sandro Volery wrote: > >> strcpy was used multiple times in strcpy to write into dev->name. > >> I replaced them with strscpy. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Sandro Volery <sandro@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> drivers/staging/octeon/ethernet.c | 16 ++++++++-------- > >> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/staging/octeon/ethernet.c b/drivers/staging/octeon/ethernet.c > >> index 8889494adf1f..cf8e9a23ebf9 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/staging/octeon/ethernet.c > >> +++ b/drivers/staging/octeon/ethernet.c > >> @@ -784,7 +784,7 @@ static int cvm_oct_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > >> priv->imode = CVMX_HELPER_INTERFACE_MODE_DISABLED; > >> priv->port = CVMX_PIP_NUM_INPUT_PORTS; > >> priv->queue = -1; > >> - strcpy(dev->name, "pow%d"); > >> + strscpy(dev->name, "pow%d", sizeof(dev->name)); > > > > Is there a program which is generating a warning for this code? We know > > that "pow%d" is 6 characters and static analysis tools can understand > > this code fine so we know it's safe. > > Well I was confused too but checkpatch complained about > it so I figured I'd clean it up quick Ah. It's a new checkpatch warning. I don't care in that case. I'm fine with replacing all of these in that case. regards, dan carpenter _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
