Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.37 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.37;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <ZSeD1UojAgrsOh16@lab-ubuntu> <1e2cfefb-c4dd-4611-867a-2b2e9e5f7467@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <1e2cfefb-c4dd-4611-867a-2b2e9e5f7467@gmail.com>
From:   Calvince Otieno <calvncce@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 12 Oct 2023 12:57:19 +0300
Message-ID: <CADFX3OT4fAGjVrp-D2fPTi6DtxUMbk+-Z0OcwRTWDBEEwb8ukQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging/wlan-ng: remove strcpy() use in favor of strscpy()
To:     Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com>
Cc:     outreachy@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com>,
        Archana <craechal@gmail.com>, Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>,
        linux-staging@lists.linux.dev
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

Yes, strscpy() has the same behavior as strncpy(). It is preferred to
strncpy() since it always returns
a valid string, and doesn't unnecessarily force the tail of the
destination buffer to be zeroed.

On Thu, Oct 12, 2023 at 12:17=E2=80=AFPM Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.co=
m> wrote:
>
> On 12/10/2023 12:27, Calvince Otieno wrote:
> >               if (j =3D=3D -1) {  /* plug the filename */
> >                       memset(dest, 0, s3plug[i].len);
> > -                     strncpy(dest, PRISM2_USB_FWFILE, s3plug[i].len - =
1);
> > +                     strscpy(dest, PRISM2_USB_FWFILE, s3plug[i].len - =
1);
>
> Is this strscpy() behavior same as previous strncpy()?
>
> --
> An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara
>