On 03/10/2014 11:28 AM, Krzysztof Opasiak wrote:
>> From: Robert Baldyga [mailto:r.bald...@samsung.com]
>>> +static int usbg_remove_file(char *path, char *name)
>>> +{
>>> + int ret;
>>> + char buf[USBG_MAX_PATH_LENGTH];
>>> +
>>> + sprintf(buf, "%s/%s", path, name);
>>
>> Maybe snprintf would be better?
>
> There is much more sprintf in library. All those functions will be
> replaced with snprintf when removing satic buffers and handling
> overflows. So it is future work in whole library
static buffer usage just begs for snprintf()-like function. It's
an error to use sprintf in this case unless you control length of
supplied variables (path and name).
Cheers,
--
Karol Lewandowski, Samsung R&D Institute Poland
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
