Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 13 May 2019 08:44:44 +0100 | From | Daniel Thompson <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] kdb: Fix bound check compiler warning |
| |
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 11:39:47AM +0800, Wenlin Kang wrote: > On 5/12/19 5:00 PM, Daniel Thompson wrote: > > On Thu, May 09, 2019 at 10:56:03AM +0800, Wenlin Kang wrote: > > > On 5/8/19 4:16 PM, Daniel Thompson wrote: > > > > On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 09:52:39AM +0800, Wenlin Kang wrote: > > > > > The strncpy() function may leave the destination string buffer > > > > > unterminated, better use strlcpy() instead. > > > > > > > > > > This fixes the following warning with gcc 8.2: > > > > > > > > > > kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_io.c: In function 'kdb_getstr': > > > > > kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_io.c:449:3: warning: 'strncpy' specified bound 256 equals destination size [-Wstringop-truncation] > > > > > strncpy(kdb_prompt_str, prompt, CMD_BUFLEN); > > > > > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Wenlin Kang <wenlin.kang@windriver.com> > > > > > --- > > > > > kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_io.c | 2 +- > > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_io.c b/kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_io.c > > > > > index 6a4b414..7fd4513 100644 > > > > > --- a/kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_io.c > > > > > +++ b/kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_io.c > > > > > @@ -446,7 +446,7 @@ static char *kdb_read(char *buffer, size_t bufsize) > > > > > char *kdb_getstr(char *buffer, size_t bufsize, const char *prompt) > > > > > { > > > > > if (prompt && kdb_prompt_str != prompt) > > > > > - strncpy(kdb_prompt_str, prompt, CMD_BUFLEN); > > > > > + strlcpy(kdb_prompt_str, prompt, CMD_BUFLEN); > > > > Shouldn't that be strscpy? > > > > > > Hi Daniel > > > > > > I thought about strscpy, but I think strlcpy is better, because it only copy > > > the real number of characters if src string less than that size. > > Sorry, I'm confused by this. What behavior does strscpy() have that you > > consider undesirable in this case? > > > Hi Daniel > > I checked strscpy() again, and think either is fine to me, if you think > strscpy() is better, I can change it to this, and send v2, thanks for your > review.
I think strscpy() is better.
Daniel.
> > > > > > Daniel. > > > > -- > Thanks, > Wenlin Kang >
| |