Re: [PATCH] migration/dirtyrate: Silence warning about strcpy() on OpenBSD

["Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com>]

On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 06:07:12PM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote:
> The linker on OpenBSD complains:
> 
>  ld: warning: dirtyrate.c:447 (../src/migration/dirtyrate.c:447)(...):
>  warning: strcpy() is almost always misused, please use strlcpy()

Is that the only place it complains ?  We use 'strcpy' in almost
100 places across the codebase....

> It's currently not a real problem in this case since both arrays
> have the same size (256 bytes). But just in case somebody changes
> the size of the source array in the future, let's better play safe
> and use g_strlcpy() here instead.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
> ---
>  migration/dirtyrate.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/migration/dirtyrate.c b/migration/dirtyrate.c
> index 233acb0855..090c76e934 100644
> --- a/migration/dirtyrate.c
> +++ b/migration/dirtyrate.c
> @@ -444,7 +444,7 @@ static void get_ramblock_dirty_info(RAMBlock *block,
>      info->ramblock_pages = qemu_ram_get_used_length(block) >>
>                             qemu_target_page_bits();
>      info->ramblock_addr = qemu_ram_get_host_addr(block);
> -    strcpy(info->idstr, qemu_ram_get_idstr(block));
> +    g_strlcpy(info->idstr, qemu_ram_get_idstr(block), sizeof(info->idstr));
>  }

Reviewed-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@redhat.com>


Is it worth also adding

  G_STATIC_ASSERT(sizeof((struct RamblockDirtyInfo){}.idstr) ==
                  sizeof((struct RAMBlock){}.idstr));

at the top of this file, since both of these fields are expected to
be the same size by this code, to avoid truncation.


With regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|