[PATCH net-next v2] NFC: s3fwrn5: Replace strcpy() with strscpy()

tomasz.unger@yahoo.pl posted 1 patch 1 month, 2 weeks ago
There is a newer version of this series
drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/firmware.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
[PATCH net-next v2] NFC: s3fwrn5: Replace strcpy() with strscpy()
Posted by tomasz.unger@yahoo.pl 1 month, 2 weeks ago
From: Tomasz Unger <tomasz.unger@yahoo.pl>

Replace strcpy() with strscpy() which limits the copy to the size of
the destination buffer. Since fw_info->fw_name is an array with a fixed, declared size, the
two-argument variant of strscpy() is used - the compiler deduces
the buffer size automatically.

This is a defensive cleanup replacing the deprecated strcpy()
with the preferred strscpy().

Signed-off-by: Tomasz Unger <tomasz.unger@yahoo.pl>
---
Changes since v1:
- Clarified commit message: fw_info->fw_name described as
  "an array with a fixed, declared size" as requested by
  Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>

Testing:
- checkpatch.pl: 0 errors, 0 warnings
- make M=drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/: compiled successfully, 0 errors, 0 warnings
- Module loaded successfully in QEMU (x86_64) with buildroot:
  modprobe s3fwrn5 - no errors, confirmed via lsmod

 drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/firmware.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/firmware.c b/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/firmware.c
index 64d61b2a715a..9145deec7f6c 100644
--- a/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/firmware.c
+++ b/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/firmware.c
@@ -454,7 +454,7 @@ void s3fwrn5_fw_init(struct s3fwrn5_fw_info *fw_info, const char *fw_name)
 	fw_info->parity = 0x00;
 	fw_info->rsp = NULL;
 	fw_info->fw.fw = NULL;
-	strcpy(fw_info->fw_name, fw_name);
+	strscpy(fw_info->fw_name, fw_name);
 	init_completion(&fw_info->completion);
 }
 
-- 
2.53.0
Re: [PATCH net-next v2] NFC: s3fwrn5: Replace strcpy() with strscpy()
Posted by Krzysztof Kozlowski 1 month, 2 weeks ago
On 01/03/2026 18:49, tomasz.unger@yahoo.pl wrote:
> From: Tomasz Unger <tomasz.unger@yahoo.pl>
> 
> Replace strcpy() with strscpy() which limits the copy to the size of
> the destination buffer. Since fw_info->fw_name is an array with a fixed, declared size, the

Please wrap commit message according to Linux coding style / submission
process (neither too early nor over the limit):
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.4-rc1/source/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst#L597


Best regards,
Krzysztof
Re: [PATCH net-next v2] NFC: s3fwrn5: Replace strcpy() with strscpy()
Posted by Krzysztof Kozlowski 1 month, 2 weeks ago
On 01/03/2026 18:49, tomasz.unger@yahoo.pl wrote:
> From: Tomasz Unger <tomasz.unger@yahoo.pl>
> 
> Replace strcpy() with strscpy() which limits the copy to the size of
> the destination buffer. Since fw_info->fw_name is an array with a fixed, declared size, the
> two-argument variant of strscpy() is used - the compiler deduces
> the buffer size automatically.
> 
> This is a defensive cleanup replacing the deprecated strcpy()
> with the preferred strscpy().
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tomasz Unger <tomasz.unger@yahoo.pl>
> ---
> Changes since v1:
> - Clarified commit message: fw_info->fw_name described as
>   "an array with a fixed, declared size" as requested by
>   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>


And ignored the rest?

<form letter>
This is a friendly reminder during the review process.

It looks like you received a tag and forgot to add it.

If you do not know the process, here is a short explanation:
Please add Acked-by/Reviewed-by/Tested-by tags when posting new versions
of patchset, under or above your Signed-off-by tag, unless patch changed
significantly (e.g. new properties added to the DT bindings). Tag is
"received", when provided in a message replied to you on the mailing
list. Tools like b4 can help here. However, there's no need to repost
patches *only* to add the tags. The upstream maintainer will do that for
tags received on the version they apply.

Please read:
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.12-rc3/source/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst#L577

If a tag was not added on purpose, please state why and what changed.
</form letter>

Best regards,
Krzysztof