[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210827173633.GA3040@titan>
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2021 19:36:33 +0200
From: Len Baker <len.baker@....com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: Len Baker <len.baker@....com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
Robert Richter <rric@...nel.org>,
Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] EDAC/mc: Prefer strscpy over strcpy
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 08:26:10PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 12:28:07PM +0200, Len Baker wrote:
> > This is a task of the KSPP [1] and the main reason is to clean up the
> > proliferation of str*cpy functions in the kernel.
>
> That I understood - you prominently explain where the patches stem from.
>
> What I can't parse is that formulation "previous step". What previous
> step do you mean?
Well, the main purpose is to clean up the proliferation of str*cpy functions.
One task is to remove the strcpy uses: The first step (previous step) would
be to remove all the strcpy uses. Then, as a second step remove all the
strcpy implementations.
I hope that this clarify your question.
Regards,
Len
Powered by blists - more mailing lists