Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 4 Oct 2015 16:55:24 +0100 | Subject | Re: [GIT PULL] strscpy string copy function | From | Linus Torvalds <> |
| |
On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 8:43 PM, Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@ezchip.com> wrote: > > Please pull the following changes for 4.3 from: > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/cmetcalf/linux-tile.git strscpy
So I finally pulled it. I like the patch, I like the new interface, but despite that I wasn't really sure if I wanted to pull it in - thus the long delay of me just seeing this in my list of pending pulls for almost a month, but never really getting to the point where I decided I want to commit to it.
I wrote a longish merge message about why - but it boils down to me hating the mindless trivial conversion patches. Which were not in the pull request, but I want to make it clear to everybody that I have absolutely zero interest in seeing such patches. I want to encourage judicious use of strscpy() in new code, or in code that gets modified because it is buggy or is updated for other reasons (and thus thought about and tested), but I am *not* going to accept patches that do mass conversions of strlcpy or strncpy to the new interface.
So just pulling the support seemed safe since ghere are no actual *users* of this yet. So it's purely preparatory for future patches, so it still made sense just before I'm doing an -rc4. Of course, I hope I won't regret that "seems safe", since I'm sure the newly exposed word-at-a-time things may well break architectures that I am not test-compiling (ie all of them except x86-64), but it looked fine and any breakage should be trivial.
Side note: I'm not entirely convinced about the "__must_check". There are real cases where you don't really care whether you get a full string or not, and strncpy() or strlcpy() may be unacceptable due to their respective problems. But let's see once we start getting real users who really thought about what they want.
Linus
| |