linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next 0/2] sparc: use snprintf() in show() methods

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sun, 10 May 2020 18:32:07 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     chenzhou <chenzhou10@...wei.com>, davem@...emloft.net
Cc:     sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next 0/2] sparc: use snprintf() in show() methods

On Mon, 2020-05-11 at 09:24 +0800, chenzhou wrote:
> Sorry, i made a mistake, should be scnprintf().

No worries.

But why do you think this is useful?
Is it likely that either snprint length will exceed PAGE_SIZE?

> 
> On 2020/5/9 19:40, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Sat, 2020-05-09 at 17:18 +0800, Chen Zhou wrote:
> > > snprintf() returns the number of bytes that would be written,
> > > which may be greater than the the actual length to be written.
> > []
> > > Chen Zhou (2):
> > >   sparc: use snprintf() in show_pciobppath_attr() in pci.c
> > >   sparc: use snprintf() in show_pciobppath_attr() in vio.c
> > Your subjects are a bit off: snprintf vs scnprintf
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
>