Re: [PATCH] lpfc: fix model description

[Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@sandisk.com>]

On 04/27/15 00:32, Sebastian Herbszt wrote:
> Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> * Switch from snprintf() to scnprintf() because the latter function
>>     guarantees '\0'-termination if the output has to be truncated.
>
> Doesn't snprintf() guarantee this too? The only difference between
> snprintf() and scnprintf() seems to be the return value.
> snprintf() calls vsnprintf() and scnprintf() calls vscnprintf() which
> calls vsnprintf() itself.

Hello Sebastian,

In my e-mail I was referring to the pre-C99 behavior of snprintf(). 
Apparently the snprintf() function in the Linux kernel is compliant with 
the C99 specs. See e.g. 
http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/7908799/xsh/fprintf.html and 
http://pubs.opengroup.org/stage7tc1/functions/fprintf.html#. In the 
latter document it has been mentioned that "output bytes beyond the 
n-1st shall be discarded", something which has not been mentioned in the 
former document.

Bart.