Comment 10 for bug 1803872

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 12:03:34PM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 05:38:17PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > On 18/12/18 15:54, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 03:45:08PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > >> On 18/12/18 15:31, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > >>> Do you happen to know why does it build fine with
> > >>> Gcc 8.2.1?
> > >>>
> > >>> Reading the GCC manual it seems that
> > >>> there is a "nostring" attribute that means
> > >>> "might not be 0 terminated".
> > >>> I think we should switch to that which fixes the warning
> > >>> but also warns if someone tries to misuse these
> > >>> as C-strings.
> > >>>
> > >>> Seems to be a better option, does it not?
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> Using strpadcpy is clever and self-documenting, though. We have it
> > >> already, so why not use it.
> > >>
> > >> Paolo
> > >
> > > The advantage of nonstring is that it will catch attempts to
> > > use these fields with functions that expect a 0 terminated string.
> > >
> > > strpadcpy will instead just silence the warning.
> >
> > Ah, I see. We could also do both, that's a matter of taste.
> >
> > Paolo
>
> Do you happen to know how to make gcc check the buffer size
> for strpadcpy? Is the name strncpy just hard-coded?

GCC provides strncpy as a builtin function and its warning only
checks its builtin.

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 :|