From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <thomas@monjalon.net>
Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com
 [66.111.4.27]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FE4D231E
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 22 May 2018 21:42:45 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41])
 by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2010520E5F;
 Tue, 22 May 2018 15:42:45 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162])
 by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 22 May 2018 15:42:45 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h=
 cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to
 :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender
 :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=0GVIb/MvWVZGT5XH0Rs0T8TInR
 aCyPcxHhVjxNOX14M=; b=eL6w6T6ZK6s+ZsLLeY+EYIzGpXSps1TqN/yEO6XGJH
 udflRIi9klKsUdCMMkiUYp4klnvbjutIHf8uaCkkwowq5m468att0vIqWXqgZfLd
 tbn8DwpMDeoIKK+oHfN9G9wziQapbqhgie6YT9jCNvV5bMPrVLpv27tln2umdDGr
 0=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=
 messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type
 :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references
 :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=0GVIb/
 MvWVZGT5XH0Rs0T8TInRaCyPcxHhVjxNOX14M=; b=AT2mjAZcvd7xe5msR8giBZ
 FBfogfozRqiJYHN97dHtpNlhvZRGBvix7JrlwnVI13SF7enLKIr1VwW26zpKcGZE
 zaTIhd0eW6X3DBU6LV/Qs5oyi3pTBDWR62OQ0e62wrOxqqBaBilPuzB9sS1fMpeN
 j7P6DE2Zo2nnKsDV7tJP4LRCz6IiusuPiNkjNxKhEGx+UQ4PsIqcO5qSOvsJl1TH
 xm/QGYmizWp3mpzvTeLgOTKdM0myiXMrj3HiijDmR6KQeKm4cTc0yJsdW5Pt9giP
 zTHZIFt93Q8P6BzzHcgU2Nf19eu8smhHtMIBRckJZYw6pAANeVzirV2C0HIvTuLg
 ==
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:tHIEWwTtismdBau-zKHHzzJiwX34gqgWhA5e0NCP5A_e0IPLD1bIEA>
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:tHIEW5M0-mIXQX8SRVWoEWHraXDgv7pAaOSButZGhV50rpbQeNgYPA>
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:tHIEWxYK4bEp_8pUx-amlAcKd_YOIxZVE4imWzOloADixEnw5w7zpQ>
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:tHIEW9AuMB8JHVU1EYxmDsZcIQquJbDVzL96_-RoUnLcRUzRg8K0SQ>
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:tHIEW2o3xl1rsYKJgM65zoxUM7SFYFVNMg9gycylP1Rm-OoFMFVzJQ>
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:tXIEW0rDcR5zsJ5JeZMQkio6tnHZrdezz2_Ty9LfTKR6IT5Z0Dp9hw>
X-ME-Sender: <xms:tHIEWy6cUOO26tuvqhFA3oQbSMrNZmbtR1ueH4lAnfWN39CM8mamZA>
Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184])
 by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 7F323E4115;
 Tue, 22 May 2018 15:42:44 -0400 (EDT)
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
To: "Liu, Changpeng" <changpeng.liu@intel.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 20:18:03 +0200
Message-ID: <9373529.Cr5sn6mvdD@xps>
In-Reply-To: <FF7FC980937D6342B9D289F5F3C7C2625B65CCE8@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
References: <1526599932-13083-1-git-send-email-changpeng.liu@intel.com>
 <3339436.bIZ7ygsVkQ@xps>
 <FF7FC980937D6342B9D289F5F3C7C2625B65CCE8@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] examples/vhost_scsi: fix potential
	buffer overrun with safe copy API
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 19:42:45 -0000

22/05/2018 19:58, Liu, Changpeng:
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net]
> > 18/05/2018 01:32, Changpeng Liu:
> > > -			strlcpy((char *)vpage->params, bdev->name,
> > > -					sizeof(vpage->params));
> > > +			vhost_strcpy_pad((char *)vpage->params, bdev->name,
> > > +					sizeof(vpage->params), ' ');
> > 
> > Why do you think vhost_strcpy_pad is safer than strlcpy?
> 
> A code Coverity issue 279452 reported for strlcpy, so here replace with internal API can avoid it.

I think it is a false positive.
Remember that Coverity is just a tool.