On 2013年04月26日 22:41, Bill Pemberton wrote: >> > >> > It seems likely to me that changing this struct is going to break >> > things. But maybe we could change the other side and say that the >> > desc can be 99 characters and a NUL maximum. Probably no one will >> > notice a change like that. >> > > That seems like a great solution. The one place where nd_ps_desc is > used now assumes it to work that way anyhow. It is just your implementation: "so I think the version of this patch that uses strlcpy is a better way go. In addition, I think nd_ps_desc in the nd_struct struct should be changed to MAX_DESC_LEN to avoid this confusion down the road." If all of us agree with each other, could you help to send the related fix patch ? Thanks. :-) -- Chen Gang Asianux Corporation _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
