Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> writes: > On 7 June 2012 09:13, Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> wrote: >> Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> writes: >>> I think it matters in the general case, yours is just the first >>> usage of this API which has caught my attention. We should fix >>> the API before adding more uses of it (at the moment it seems to >>> be only used in two places). >> >> What kind of fix do you have in mind? > > Option 1: the function should guarantee that it won't ever > use more than X bytes of buffer, and provide a #define that > corresponds to that maximum length. > > Option 2: this: vv > >>> Alternatively, we could have the function return a const char* rather >>> than taking a buffer to be filled in. >> >> Trades the theoretical string truncation problem for a theoretical >> dangling pointer problem. > > Yes, you'd need to come up with some reasonable lifecycle > management if you took this option.
Actually, the lifecycle is trivial, because it's a *driver* name, and drivers never go away. Taking option 2.
