> inqdata[0] = TYPE_PROCESSOR; > /* Periph Qualifier & Periph Dev Type */ > inqdata[1] = 0; > /* rem media bit & Dev Type Modifier */ > inqdata[2] = 0; > /* ISO, ECMA, & ANSI versions */ > inqdata[4] = 31; > /* length of additional data */ > strncpy(&inqdata[8], "Areca ", 8); > /* Vendor Identification */ >>>> strncpy(&inqdata[16], "RAID controller ", 16); > /* Product Identification */ > strncpy(&inqdata[32], "R001", 4); /* Product Revision */ > That strncpy() will indeed fail to copy the trailing null, but it looks > like that null isn't appropriate in the inquiry data. > > So I suspect this is a valid usage of strncpy() and the checking is > just too strict. > > otoh if this is the only place where we hit this issue then perhaps we > can switch to memcpy() and get on with life ;) Hmm, yes, I think you're right and gcc is being a bit ambitious here - although I can understand the warning given that the behaviour relied upon here is rarely going to be what the developer intendend! We could build the file with -Wno-stringop-truncation, but I do wonder if memcpy might make the semantics more obvious... Regards, Daniel
