> On 15 May 2023, at 09:45, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 11:57:37AM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> Looking at the snprintf sites made me remember a patchset I worked on last
>> year
>> (but I don't remember if I ended up submitting); there is no need to build
>> one
>> o
On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 11:57:37AM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> I think it's intentionally done in 73b9952e82 as defensive coding, and given
> that this is far from a hot codepath I think leaving them is better.
>
> Instead I think it would be more worthwhile to remove these snprintf() made
>
> On 11 May 2023, at 06:24, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 01:06:42PM +1000, Peter Smith wrote:
>> While reviewing another patch to the file info.c, I noticed there seem
>> to be some unnecessary calls to strlen(query) in get_rel_infos()
>> function.
>>
>> i.e. The query is e
On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 01:06:42PM +1000, Peter Smith wrote:
> While reviewing another patch to the file info.c, I noticed there seem
> to be some unnecessary calls to strlen(query) in get_rel_infos()
> function.
>
> i.e. The query is explicitly initialized to an empty string
> immediately prior,
Hi.
While reviewing another patch to the file info.c, I noticed there seem
to be some unnecessary calls to strlen(query) in get_rel_infos()
function.
i.e. The query is explicitly initialized to an empty string
immediately prior, so why the strlen?
PSA patch for this.
--
Kind Regards,
Peter
