Marc Zyngier <[email protected]> 于2019年7月30日周二 下午7:13写道： > > On 30/07/2019 11:58, Chuhong Yuan wrote: > > Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]> 于2019年7月30日周二 下午5:17写道： > >> > >> On Mon, 29 Jul 2019, Chuhong Yuan wrote: > >> > >>> strncmp(str, const, len) is error-prone. > >>> We had better use newly introduced > >>> str_has_prefix() instead of it. > >> > >> Can you please provide a proper explanation why the below strncmp() is > >> error prone? > >> > > > > If the size is less than 7, for example, 2, then even if buf is "tr", the > > result will still be true. This is an error. > > strncmp(str, const, len) is error-prone mainly because the len is easy > > to be wrong. > > > >> Just running a script and copying some boiler plate changelog saying > >> 'strncmp() is error prone' does not cut it. > >> > >>> - if (!strncmp(buf, "trigger", size)) { > >>> + if (str_has_prefix(buf, "trigger")) { > >> > >> Especially when the resulting code is not equivalent. > >> > > > > I think here the semantic is the comparison should only return true > > when buf is "trigger". > > Not quite. It will satisfy the condition for 't', 'tr', 'trig', > 'trigger', and of course 'triggerthissillyinterruptwhichImdebugging'. > > I agree that the semantic is a bit bizarre and maybe not quite expected, > but still... You seem to be changing the semantic without any > justification other than "this is safer". >
I am sorry about that... It is my fault. I will improve my script and avoid such mistakes. Thanks for your correction. Regards, Chuhong > Thanks, > > M. > -- > Jazz is not dead, it just smells funny...
