[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aPkfsuliKYy5UAbB@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2025 21:17:22 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Thorsten Blum <thorsten.blum@...ux.dev>
Cc: Giovanni Cabiddu <giovanni.cabiddu@...el.com>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jack Xu <jack.xu@...el.com>,
Suman Kumar Chakraborty <suman.kumar.chakraborty@...el.com>,
Qianfeng Rong <rongqianfeng@...o.com>, qat-linux@...el.com,
linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] crypto: qat - use strscpy_pad to simplify buffer
initialization
On Wed, Oct 22, 2025 at 02:36:19PM +0200, Thorsten Blum wrote:
> Use strscpy_pad() to copy the string and zero-pad the destination buffer
> in a single step instead of zero-initializing the buffer first and then
> immediately overwriting it using strscpy().
>
> Replace the magic number 16 with sizeof(buf) and remove the redundant
> parentheses around kstrtoul() while we're at it.
I understand that you focused on strscpy*() conversions, but the below I think
needs a bigger refactoring, see my remarks.
...
> - char buf[16] = {0};
> + char buf[16] = {};
> unsigned long ae = 0;
> int i;
>
> - strscpy(buf, str, sizeof(buf));
> - for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) {
> + strscpy_pad(buf, str);
First of all, why do we need a _pad() version here? Is the data somehow being
used as a whole?
> + for (i = 0; i < sizeof(buf); i++) {
> if (!isdigit(buf[i])) {
> buf[i] = '\0';
> break;
> }
> }
> - if ((kstrtoul(buf, 10, &ae)))
> + if (kstrtoul(buf, 10, &ae))
> return -EFAULT;
Looking at this, it tries to work around the kstrtoul() inability to perform
partial parses. Instead, this should do something like
unsigned long long x;
const char *end;
simple_strtoull(...);
if (x > UINT_MAX || end == buf)
return $ERR; // wrong input / overflow
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists