[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKwvOdkcq4TeFQ_Cw39DyA+N6rhyx2q9jpvN+Cv9n7x+MwijmA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2020 19:00:59 -0700
From: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
To: Arvind Sankar <nivedita@...m.mit.edu>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Dávid Bolvanský <david.bolvansky@...il.com>,
Eli Friedman <efriedma@...cinc.com>,
"# 3.4.x" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>,
Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>,
Daniel Axtens <dja@...ens.net>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
"Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Alexandru Ardelean <alexandru.ardelean@...log.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib/string.c: implement stpcpy
On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 6:33 PM Arvind Sankar <nivedita@...m.mit.edu> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 05:24:15PM -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> > +#ifndef __HAVE_ARCH_STPCPY
> > +/**
> > + * stpcpy - copy a string from src to dest returning a pointer to the new end
> > + * of dest, including src's NULL terminator. May overrun dest.
> > + * @dest: pointer to end of string being copied into. Must be large enough
> > + * to receive copy.
> > + * @src: pointer to the beginning of string being copied from. Must not overlap
> > + * dest.
> > + *
> > + * stpcpy differs from strcpy in two key ways:
> > + * 1. inputs must not overlap.
> > + * 2. return value is the new NULL terminated character. (for strcpy, the
> > + * return value is a pointer to src.
> > + */
> > +#undef stpcpy
> > +char *stpcpy(char *__restrict__ dest, const char *__restrict__ src)
> > +{
> > + while ((*dest++ = *src++) != '\0')
> > + /* nothing */;
> > + return dest;
> > +}
> > +#endif
> > +
>
> Won't this return a pointer that's one _past_ the terminating NUL? I
> think you need the increments to be inside the loop body, rather than as
> part of the condition.
Yep, looks like I had a bug in my test program that masked this.
Thanks for triple checking.
>
> Nit: NUL is more correct than NULL to refer to the string terminator.
TIL.
--
Thanks,
~Nick Desaulniers
Powered by blists - more mailing lists