Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758631AbcDHPeK (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Apr 2016 11:34:10 -0400 Received: from mail-io0-f180.google.com ([209.85.223.180]:35399 "EHLO mail-io0-f180.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753138AbcDHPeI (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Apr 2016 11:34:08 -0400 Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2016 11:34:00 -0400 (EDT) From: martin@omnibond.com X-X-Sender: mkb@tp.mkb.name To: Mike Marshall cc: Andy Shevchenko , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Linux FS Devel Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] orangefs: strncpy -> strlcpy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <1459801598-12757-1-git-send-email-martin@martinbrandenburg.com> <1459801598-12757-2-git-send-email-martin@martinbrandenburg.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (BSO 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1708 Lines: 48 > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 2:39 PM, Andy Shevchenko > wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 11:26 PM, Martin Brandenburg wrote: > >> From: Martin Brandenburg > >> > >> Almost everywhere we use strncpy we should use strlcpy. This affects > >> path names (d_name mostly), symlink targets, and server names. > >> > >> Leave debugfs code as is for now, though it could use a review as well. > >> > > > > |Why not strscpy() as most robust one? Mostly because I hadn't heard about strscpy. On Thu, 7 Apr 2016, Mike Marshall wrote: > It looks like strscpy went in last October... there are > no users of it yet. I was just about to send in a pull request > that includes Martin's strncpy->strlcpy patch when I saw > Andy's comment. > > Linus said when he pulled strscpy: > > > So I'm pulling the strscpy() support because it *is* a better interface. > > But I will refuse to pull mindless conversion patches. Use this in > > places where it makes sense, but don't do trivial patches to fix things > > that aren't actually known to be broken. > > Maybe it makes sense for our strncpy->strlcpy patch to be a strscpy > patch instead? Maybe our strncpy->strlcpy patch is itself a > "mindless conversion patch"? (I don't think so)... There is something broken! If the client-core sends in a string with no NUL terminator, we would blindly copy it into the d_name with strncpy. > > I'll wait until tomorrow, and then send my pull request as it is, unless > everyone chimes in and says "use strscpy!"... > > -Mike After looking over strscpy I don't see a compelling reason not to go ahead and use it while we're fixing up this code. -- Martin