On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 10:19:02AM +0000, Burakov, Anatoly wrote: > On 10-Dec-18 10:50 AM, Richardson, Bruce wrote: > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Burakov, Anatoly > > > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2018 10:43 AM > > > To: Jakub Grajciar <jgraj...@cisco.com>; dev@dpdk.org > > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC v2] /net: memory interface (memif) > > > > > > On 10-Dec-18 10:06 AM, Jakub Grajciar wrote: > > > > Signed-off-by: Jakub Grajciar <jgraj...@cisco.com> > > > > --- > > > > > > As a general comment, some description/cover letter would have been nice. > > > > > > > + > > > > + memif_msg_disconnect_t *d = &e->msg.disconnect; > > > > + > > > > + e->msg.type = MEMIF_MSG_TYPE_DISCONNECT; > > > > + d->code = err_code; > > > > + > > > > + if (reason != NULL) { > > > > + strncpy((char *)d->string, reason, strlen(reason)); > > > > + if (cc->pmd != NULL) { > > > > + strncpy(cc->pmd->local_disc_string, reason, > > > > + strlen(reason)); > > > > + } > > > > > > I haven't looked at the entire thing, this is just something that caught > > > my eye during quick skimming through code. > > > > > > On the face of it, this looks dangerous - you're setting the destination > > > buffer size from source buffer size. What if `d->string` is shorter than > > > `reason`? > > > > > > > And strncpy is dangerous - use strlcpy instead. > > Isn't strscpy the string copy function du jour now? :) > Well, it's certainly the new one! It's only available as a DPDK-specific function though - "rte_strscpy". Therefore, I think strlcpy is generally preferred, but either will do.
/Bruce
