> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 2:39 PM, Andy Shevchenko > <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 11:26 PM, Martin Brandenburg <martin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> From: Martin Brandenburg <martin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> 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 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
