[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220711121014.6f9e75cb@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2022 12:10:14 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: "XueBing Chen" <chenxuebing@...i.cn>
Cc: mingo@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing: use strscpy to replace strlcpy
On Mon, 11 Jul 2022 10:41:25 -0400
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jul 2022 22:26:12 +0800 (GMT+08:00)
> "XueBing Chen" <chenxuebing@...i.cn> wrote:
>
> > The strlcpy should not be used because it doesn't limit the source
> > length. Preferred is strscpy.
>
> That's not enough justification to make the switch.
>
> These calls are done at boot up. If there's a bug in the source, I rather
> have it crash.
And unless there is good justification and understanding of how the code
works, blindly switching strlcpy() with strscpy() can have undesirable
consequences:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220701094403.3044-1-adrian.hunter@intel.com/T/#u
Please stop changing all strlcpy() to strscpy() unless there's good
justification to do so. Just saying "strscpy() is preferred", is not
justification to make the change.
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists