| Message ID | 20241029221641.15726-1-abdul.rahim@myyahoo.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Changes Requested |
| Delegated to: | Netdev Maintainers |
| Headers | show |
| Series | nfc: s3fwrn5: Prefer strscpy() over strcpy() | expand |
On 29/10/2024 23:16, Abdul Rahim wrote: > strcpy() performs no bounds checking on the destination buffer. This > could result in linear overflows beyond the end of the buffer, leading > to all kinds of misbehaviors [1] > > this fixes checkpatch warning: > WARNING: Prefer strscpy over strcpy You should explain why it is safe to omit the destination buffer size. Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> Best regards, Krzysztof
Do i need to resend it. What additional information do I need to provide?
On 25/11/2024 21:41, Abdul Rahim wrote: > Do i need to resend it. What additional information do I need to > provide? You cut entire email, no clue what's this. Best regards, Krzysztof
On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 07:38:43AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 25/11/2024 21:41, Abdul Rahim wrote: > > Do i need to resend it. What additional information do I need to > > provide? > > > You cut entire email, no clue what's this. > > Best regards, > Krzysztof > Do I need to resend this patch [1]. You gave it `Reviewed-by` tag. But it's not applied yet. [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20241029221641.15726-1-abdul.rahim@myyahoo.com/ Thanks, Abdul
On 26/11/2024 09:49, Abdul Rahim wrote: > On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 07:38:43AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 25/11/2024 21:41, Abdul Rahim wrote: >>> Do i need to resend it. What additional information do I need to >>> provide? >> >> >> You cut entire email, no clue what's this. >> >> Best regards, >> Krzysztof >> > > Do I need to resend this patch [1]. You gave it `Reviewed-by` tag. But > it's not applied yet. > > [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20241029221641.15726-1-abdul.rahim@myyahoo.com/ First, it is merge window, no point to ping during that time. It is actually highly discouraged, unless this is a fix. And it is not a fix. Second, this should have net-next PATCH prefix, see subsystem profile for networking. I asked to change things in commit msg, so I expect next version, not resend. Best regards, Krzysztof
diff --git a/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/firmware.c b/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/firmware.c index c20fdbac51c5..85fa84d93883 100644 --- a/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/firmware.c +++ b/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/firmware.c @@ -469,7 +469,7 @@ void s3fwrn5_fw_init(struct s3fwrn5_fw_info *fw_info, const char *fw_name) fw_info->parity = 0x00; fw_info->rsp = NULL; fw_info->fw.fw = NULL; - strcpy(fw_info->fw_name, fw_name); + strscpy(fw_info->fw_name, fw_name); init_completion(&fw_info->completion); }
strcpy() performs no bounds checking on the destination buffer. This could result in linear overflows beyond the end of the buffer, leading to all kinds of misbehaviors [1] this fixes checkpatch warning: WARNING: Prefer strscpy over strcpy Link: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/deprecated.html#strcpy [1] Signed-off-by: Abdul Rahim <abdul.rahim@myyahoo.com> --- drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/firmware.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)