Message ID | 20250519063840.6743-1-siddarthsgml@gmail.com |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
Series | [v2] rbd: replace strcpy() with strscpy() | expand |
On 5/19/25 1:38 AM, Siddarth Gundu wrote: > strcpy() is deprecated; use strscpy() instead. > > Both the destination and source buffer are of fixed length > so strscpy with 2-arguments is used. > > Introduce a typedef for cookie array to improve code clarity. > > Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/88 > Signed-off-by: Siddarth Gundu <siddarthsgml@gmail.com> > --- > changes since v1 > - added a typedef for cookie arrays > > About the typedef: I was a bit hesitant to add it since the kernel > style guide is against adding new typedef but I wanted to follow > the review feedback for this. I personally think the typedef here is the appropriate. But it's really up to Ilya whether he likes this approach. Get his input before you do more. There's a basic question about whether this is a useful abstraction. It's used for "lock cookies" but do they serve a broader purpose? The other part of my suggestion was to define functions that provide an API. For example: static inline rbd_cookie_t rbd_cookie_set(rbd_cookie_t cookie, u64 id); static inline u64 rbd_cookie_get(rbd_cookie_t cookie); Anyway, before I say any more let's see if Ilya even wants to go in this direction. Your original proposal was OK, I just thought specifying the length might be safer. -Alex > drivers/block/rbd.c | 13 ++++++++----- > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/block/rbd.c b/drivers/block/rbd.c > index faafd7ff43d6..863d9c591aa5 100644 > --- a/drivers/block/rbd.c > +++ b/drivers/block/rbd.c > @@ -46,11 +46,14 @@ > #include <linux/slab.h> > #include <linux/idr.h> > #include <linux/workqueue.h> > +#include <linux/string.h> > > #include "rbd_types.h" > > #define RBD_DEBUG /* Activate rbd_assert() calls */ > > +typedef char rbd_cookie_t[32]; > + > /* > * Increment the given counter and return its updated value. > * If the counter is already 0 it will not be incremented. > @@ -411,7 +414,7 @@ struct rbd_device { > > struct rw_semaphore lock_rwsem; > enum rbd_lock_state lock_state; > - char lock_cookie[32]; > + rbd_cookie_t lock_cookie; > struct rbd_client_id owner_cid; > struct work_struct acquired_lock_work; > struct work_struct released_lock_work; > @@ -3649,12 +3652,12 @@ static void format_lock_cookie(struct rbd_device *rbd_dev, char *buf) > mutex_unlock(&rbd_dev->watch_mutex); > } > > -static void __rbd_lock(struct rbd_device *rbd_dev, const char *cookie) > +static void __rbd_lock(struct rbd_device *rbd_dev, const rbd_cookie_t cookie) > { > struct rbd_client_id cid = rbd_get_cid(rbd_dev); > > rbd_dev->lock_state = RBD_LOCK_STATE_LOCKED; > - strcpy(rbd_dev->lock_cookie, cookie); > + strscpy(rbd_dev->lock_cookie, cookie); > rbd_set_owner_cid(rbd_dev, &cid); > queue_work(rbd_dev->task_wq, &rbd_dev->acquired_lock_work); > } > @@ -3665,7 +3668,7 @@ static void __rbd_lock(struct rbd_device *rbd_dev, const char *cookie) > static int rbd_lock(struct rbd_device *rbd_dev) > { > struct ceph_osd_client *osdc = &rbd_dev->rbd_client->client->osdc; > - char cookie[32]; > + rbd_cookie_t cookie; > int ret; > > WARN_ON(__rbd_is_lock_owner(rbd_dev) || > @@ -4581,7 +4584,7 @@ static void rbd_unregister_watch(struct rbd_device *rbd_dev) > static void rbd_reacquire_lock(struct rbd_device *rbd_dev) > { > struct ceph_osd_client *osdc = &rbd_dev->rbd_client->client->osdc; > - char cookie[32]; > + rbd_cookie_t cookie; > int ret; > > if (!rbd_quiesce_lock(rbd_dev))
On 5/20/25 10:44 AM, Alex Elder wrote: > On 5/19/25 1:38 AM, Siddarth Gundu wrote: >> strcpy() is deprecated; use strscpy() instead. >> >> Both the destination and source buffer are of fixed length >> so strscpy with 2-arguments is used. >> >> Introduce a typedef for cookie array to improve code clarity. >> >> Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/88 >> Signed-off-by: Siddarth Gundu <siddarthsgml@gmail.com> >> --- >> changes since v1 >> - added a typedef for cookie arrays >> >> About the typedef: I was a bit hesitant to add it since the kernel >> style guide is against adding new typedef but I wanted to follow >> the review feedback for this. > > I personally think the typedef here is the appropriate. But > it's really up to Ilya whether he likes this approach. Get > his input before you do more. In any case, this should be 2 patches at that point, not collapsed into one patch.
On Tue, May 20, 2025 at 10:14 PM Alex Elder <elder@ieee.org> wrote: > I personally think the typedef here is the appropriate. But > it's really up to Ilya whether he likes this approach. Get > his input before you do more. right, understood. > There's a basic question about whether this is a useful > abstraction. It's used for "lock cookies" but do they > serve a broader purpose? > > The other part of my suggestion was to define functions that > provide an API. For example: > > static inline rbd_cookie_t rbd_cookie_set(rbd_cookie_t cookie, u64 id); > static inline u64 rbd_cookie_get(rbd_cookie_t cookie); I see, I will try implementing such functions. Because of using typedef I made minimal code changes. Thanks for the detailed input > Anyway, before I say any more let's see if Ilya even wants > to go in this direction. Your original proposal was OK, I > just thought specifying the length might be safer. Alright, I'll wait for feedback before making any changes. Thanks for taking time to review the patch -- With Gratitude Siddarth Gundu
On Tue, May 20, 2025 at 10:26 PM Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> wrote: > > On 5/20/25 10:44 AM, Alex Elder wrote: > > On 5/19/25 1:38 AM, Siddarth Gundu wrote: > >> strcpy() is deprecated; use strscpy() instead. > >> > >> Both the destination and source buffer are of fixed length > >> so strscpy with 2-arguments is used. > >> > >> Introduce a typedef for cookie array to improve code clarity. > >> > >> Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/88 > >> Signed-off-by: Siddarth Gundu <siddarthsgml@gmail.com> > >> --- > >> changes since v1 > >> - added a typedef for cookie arrays > >> > >> About the typedef: I was a bit hesitant to add it since the kernel > >> style guide is against adding new typedef but I wanted to follow > >> the review feedback for this. > > > > I personally think the typedef here is the appropriate. But > > it's really up to Ilya whether he likes this approach. Get > > his input before you do more. > > In any case, this should be 2 patches at that point, not collapsed > into one patch. Understood. If the typedef approach is a go after Ilya's feedback, I'll split the changes into two separate patches as you suggested. Thanks a lot for the review. -- With Gratitude Siddarth Gundu
diff --git a/drivers/block/rbd.c b/drivers/block/rbd.c index faafd7ff43d6..863d9c591aa5 100644 --- a/drivers/block/rbd.c +++ b/drivers/block/rbd.c @@ -46,11 +46,14 @@ #include <linux/slab.h> #include <linux/idr.h> #include <linux/workqueue.h> +#include <linux/string.h> #include "rbd_types.h" #define RBD_DEBUG /* Activate rbd_assert() calls */ +typedef char rbd_cookie_t[32]; + /* * Increment the given counter and return its updated value. * If the counter is already 0 it will not be incremented. @@ -411,7 +414,7 @@ struct rbd_device { struct rw_semaphore lock_rwsem; enum rbd_lock_state lock_state; - char lock_cookie[32]; + rbd_cookie_t lock_cookie; struct rbd_client_id owner_cid; struct work_struct acquired_lock_work; struct work_struct released_lock_work; @@ -3649,12 +3652,12 @@ static void format_lock_cookie(struct rbd_device *rbd_dev, char *buf) mutex_unlock(&rbd_dev->watch_mutex); } -static void __rbd_lock(struct rbd_device *rbd_dev, const char *cookie) +static void __rbd_lock(struct rbd_device *rbd_dev, const rbd_cookie_t cookie) { struct rbd_client_id cid = rbd_get_cid(rbd_dev); rbd_dev->lock_state = RBD_LOCK_STATE_LOCKED; - strcpy(rbd_dev->lock_cookie, cookie); + strscpy(rbd_dev->lock_cookie, cookie); rbd_set_owner_cid(rbd_dev, &cid); queue_work(rbd_dev->task_wq, &rbd_dev->acquired_lock_work); } @@ -3665,7 +3668,7 @@ static void __rbd_lock(struct rbd_device *rbd_dev, const char *cookie) static int rbd_lock(struct rbd_device *rbd_dev) { struct ceph_osd_client *osdc = &rbd_dev->rbd_client->client->osdc; - char cookie[32]; + rbd_cookie_t cookie; int ret; WARN_ON(__rbd_is_lock_owner(rbd_dev) || @@ -4581,7 +4584,7 @@ static void rbd_unregister_watch(struct rbd_device *rbd_dev) static void rbd_reacquire_lock(struct rbd_device *rbd_dev) { struct ceph_osd_client *osdc = &rbd_dev->rbd_client->client->osdc; - char cookie[32]; + rbd_cookie_t cookie; int ret; if (!rbd_quiesce_lock(rbd_dev))
strcpy() is deprecated; use strscpy() instead. Both the destination and source buffer are of fixed length so strscpy with 2-arguments is used. Introduce a typedef for cookie array to improve code clarity. Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/88 Signed-off-by: Siddarth Gundu <siddarthsgml@gmail.com> --- changes since v1 - added a typedef for cookie arrays About the typedef: I was a bit hesitant to add it since the kernel style guide is against adding new typedef but I wanted to follow the review feedback for this. drivers/block/rbd.c | 13 ++++++++----- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)