[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <379ea973-0234-fbaf-12bc-7ec154833a0a@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2018 08:27:23 -0600
From: Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
To: Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@...ewreck.org>,
Daniel Díaz <daniel.diaz@...aro.org>
Cc: Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.com>,
Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 18/18] cpupower: change strncpy+truncation to strlcpy
On 08/14/2018 01:27 PM, Dominique Martinet wrote:
> Daniel Díaz wrote on Tue, Aug 14, 2018:
>> I can't get cpupower to compile anymore now that it made its way to linux-next:
>> [/linux/tools/power/cpupower]$ make
>> CC lib/cpufreq.o
>> [...]
>> make[1]: Entering directory '/linux/tools/power/cpupower/bench'
>> CC main.o
>> CC parse.o
>> parse.c: In function ‘prepare_config’:
>> parse.c:224:4: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘strlcpy’
>> [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
>> strlcpy(config->governor, val,
>> ^
>> CC system.o
>> CC benchmark.o
>> CC cpufreq-bench
>> .//parse.o: In function `prepare_config':
>> /linux/tools/power/cpupower/bench/parse.c:224: undefined reference
>> to `strlcpy'
>> collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
>> Makefile:25: recipe for target 'cpufreq-bench' failed
>> make[1]: *** [cpufreq-bench] Error 1
>> make[1]: Leaving directory '/linux/tools/power/cpupower/bench'
>> Makefile:258: recipe for target 'compile-bench' failed
>> make: *** [compile-bench] Error 2
>>
>> Does it need anything special to make?
>
> Ugh, no, I am really ashamed about this patch series for insufficient
> testing in general. It is currently "under rework" for an indefinite
> time frame as I have had other priorities but I'll add cpupower to the
> list...
> More precisely, the function is defined in the linux kernel but for
> userspace strlcpy is only available through libbsd, and I don't believe
> we should pull that in just for this.
>
> I'll send a second patch using snprintf and warning if a truncation
> occurs (which is the proper fix that the gcc folks intended people to do
> anyway) when I get around to it, but I would recommend to just revert
> the patch for now.
>
>
> Shuah, could you take the patch off please if you haven't pushed it to
> linus yet?
>
>
> Sorry for the time you might have spent on this,
>
I will go ahead and revert it.
thanks,
-- Shuah
Powered by blists - more mailing lists