> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe Perches [mailto:j...@perches.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2019 9:40 PM
> To: Gote, Nitin R <nitin.r.g...@intel.com>; cor...@lwn.net
> Cc: a...@linux-foundation.org; a...@canonical.com;
> keesc...@chromium.org; linux-doc@vger.kernel.org; linux-
> ker...@vger.kernel.org; kernel-harden...@lists.openwall.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] Added warnings in checkpatch.pl script to :
>
> On Tue, 2019-07-09 at 21:18 +0530, NitinGote wrote:
> > From: Nitin Gote <nitin.r.g...@intel.com>
> >
> > 1. Deprecate strcpy() in favor of strscpy().
> > 2. Deprecate strlcpy() in favor of strscpy().
> > 3. Deprecate strncpy() in favor of strscpy() or strscpy_pad().
> >
> > Updated strncpy() section in Documentation/process/deprecated.rst
> > to cover strscpy_pad() case.
>
> Please slow down your patch submission rate for this instance and respond
> appropriately to the comments you've been given.
Sure, I will explore this things more. And sorry, I missed to incorporate one
comment.
I will take care of such things.
>
> This stuff is not critical bug fixing.
>
Noted.
> The subject could be something like:
>
> Subject: [PATCH v#] Documentation/checkpatch: Prefer strscpy over
> strcpy/strlcpy
>
How about this :
Subject: [PATCH v#] Doc/checkpatch: Prefer strscpy/strscpy_pad over
strcpy/strlcpy/strncpy
> > diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> []
> > @@ -605,6 +605,20 @@ foreach my $entry (keys %deprecated_apis) { }
> > $deprecated_apis_search = "(?:${deprecated_apis_search})";
> >
> > +our %deprecated_string_apis = (
> > + "strcpy" => "strscpy",
> > + "strlcpy" => "strscpy",
> > + "strncpy" => "strscpy, strscpy_pad or
> for non-NUL-terminated strings, strncpy() can still be used, but destinations
> should be marked with the __nonstring",
>
> 'the' is not necessary.
Noted.
>
> There could likely also be a strscat created for strcat, strlcat and strncat.
>
I have not found reference for strscat in kernel.
Could you please give any reference for strscat ?
> btw:
>
> There were several defects in the kernel for misuses of strlcpy.
>
> Did you or anyone else have an opinion on stracpy to avoid duplicating the
> first argument in a sizeof()?
>
> strlcpy(foo, bar, sizeof(foo))
> to
> stracpy(foo, bar)
>
> where foo must be char array compatible ?
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/d1524130f91d7cfd61bc736623409693d2895f57.
> ca...@perches.com/
>
>
As I understood, your trying to give new interface like stracpy(), to avoid
duplication of first
argument in a sizeof(), we can also make it more robust for users by adding
check or warn in
checkpatch.pl to prefer stracpy().
Did you or anyone has opinion on this ?
Thanks,
Nitin Gote
