Hi Jan,
On 19/01/15 16:51, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 13.01.15 at 15:25, <julien.gr...@linaro.org> wrote:
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/xen/common/guestcopy.c
>> @@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
>> +#include <xen/config.h>
>> +#include <xen/lib.h>
>> +#include <xen/guest_access.h>
>> +#include <xen/err.h>
>> +
>> +/* The function copies a string from the guest and adds a NUL to
>> + * make sure the string is correctly terminated.
>> + */
>
> Coding style.
Ok.
>
>> +void *safe_copy_string_from_guest(XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(char) u_buf,
>> + size_t size, size_t max_size)
>
> Is the "safe_" prefix really meaningful? I.e. is this function more
> safe than e.g. copy_from_guest()?
It's safe in the sense, the function adds a NUL to make sure the strings
is correctly terminated.
On the first v1, you said that name "copy_string_from_guest" doesn't
match the behavior of the generic helper [1]. So which name do you
suggest for this function?
>
>> +{
>> + char *tmp;
>> +
>> + if ( size > max_size )
>> + return ERR_PTR(-ENOENT);
>
> -ENOBUFS?
I will use it.
Regards,
[1] http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2014-06/msg02361.html
--
Julien Grall
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
