Messages in this thread | | | From | "Rafael J. Wysocki" <> | Date | Tue, 25 Jul 2023 10:51:54 +0200 | Subject | Re: drivers/pnp/pnpacpi/core.c:253:17: warning: 'strncpy' specified bound 50 equals destination size |
| |
On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 7:08 AM Sunil V L <sunilvl@ventanamicro.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 07:15:22PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 4:20 PM Sunil V L <sunilvl@ventanamicro.com> wrote: > > > > > > +Rafael. > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 07:32:36PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: > > > > tree: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master > > > > head: 6eaae198076080886b9e7d57f4ae06fa782f90ef > > > > commit: a91a9ffbd3a55a0ae1bb75e2b6e85b2a03f64e8f RISC-V: Add support to build the ACPI core > > > > date: 8 weeks ago > > > > config: riscv-randconfig-r032-20230724 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20230724/202307241942.Rff2Nri5-lkp@intel.com/config) > > > > compiler: riscv64-linux-gcc (GCC) 12.3.0 > > > > reproduce: (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20230724/202307241942.Rff2Nri5-lkp@intel.com/reproduce) > > > > > > > > If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of > > > > the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags > > > > | Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> > > > > | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202307241942.Rff2Nri5-lkp@intel.com/ > > > > > > > > All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>): > > > > > > > > drivers/pnp/pnpacpi/core.c: In function 'pnpacpi_add_device.isra': > > > > >> drivers/pnp/pnpacpi/core.c:253:17: warning: 'strncpy' specified bound 50 equals destination size [-Wstringop-truncation] > > > > 253 | strncpy(dev->name, acpi_device_name(device), sizeof(dev->name)); > > > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > > > I need some help here to understand what needs to be done. This is a > > > common code across architectures. Apart from the fact that ACPI is > > > enabled for the first time for RISC-V, I am unable to understand why > > > this warning is seen now. Is this because only RISC-V gcc enables this > > > warning by default? I don't see this with clang tool chain. If this is > > > expected warning, is there a way to suppress? > > > > I think that this is relevant information: > > > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/50198319/gcc-8-wstringop-truncation-what-is-the-good-practice > > > Thank you very much! Rafael. Let me send a patch to append a NUL > explicitly to fix this issue. However, I still wonder why this code > added in 2005 getting this warning only now. Why is this not being seen > with other architecture builds?
I don't know.
| |