Hi all,
> On 8. Sep 2025, Thorsten Blum wrote:
>
> kzalloc() already zero-initializes the destination buffers, making
> strscpy() sufficient for safely copying the names. The additional
> NUL-padding performed by strscpy_pad() is unnecessary.
>
> If the destination buffer has a fixed length, str
kzalloc() already zero-initializes the destination buffers, making
strscpy() sufficient for safely copying the names. The additional
NUL-padding performed by strscpy_pad() is unnecessary.
If the destination buffer has a fixed length, strscpy() automatically
determines its size using sizeof() when
kzalloc() already zero-initializes the destination buffers, making
strscpy() sufficient for safely copying the names. The additional
NUL-padding performed by strscpy_pad() is unnecessary.
If the destination buffer has a fixed length, strscpy() automatically
determines its size using sizeof() when
kzalloc() already zero-initializes the destination buffers, making
strscpy() sufficient for safely copying the names. The additional
NUL-padding performed by strscpy_pad() is unnecessary.
If the destination buffer has a fixed length, strscpy() automatically
determines its size using sizeof() when
kzalloc() already zero-initializes the destination buffers, making
strscpy() sufficient for safely copying the names. The additional
NUL-padding performed by strscpy_pad() is unnecessary.
If the destination buffer has a fixed length, strscpy() automatically
determines its size using sizeof() when
kzalloc() already zero-initializes the destination buffers, making
strscpy() sufficient for safely copying the names. The additional
NUL-padding performed by strscpy_pad() is unnecessary.
If the destination buffer has a fixed length, strscpy() automatically
determines its size using sizeof() when
