Re: [PATCH] staging: fbtft: replace sprintf with snprintf

[Enchanted Hunter <enchantedredhunter@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1691 bytes --]

I suppose I agree with you. My patch does look silly, and I regret wasting
your time. I've just started learning kernel development. Perhaps if you
happen to have any routine task, you could suggest something that would
actually be worth doing. I'm very interested in this. I will sign with my
real name, but I'm from Russia, and I understand that this might be a big
problem right now.

вт, 2 июн. 2026 г. в 21:32, Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>:

> On Tue, Jun 2, 2026 at 8:13 PM Enchanted Hunter
> <enchantedredhunter@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Overall, it doesn't address any compiler warnings, but this is my first
> patch. I wanted to start with something concrete, and I saw an unsafe
> function and tried to fix it. The fact that the compilation behavior won't
> change is true, but the code will become a bit more formal — maybe that's a
> good thing.
>
> Not sure we need a churn on the working code.
>
> A process hint: Do not top-post.
>
> > пн, 1 июн. 2026 г. в 11:25, Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>:
> >>
> >> On Mon, Jun 1, 2026 at 3:44 AM Enchanted Hunter
> >> <enchantedredhunter@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > This patch replaces unsafe sprintf calls with snprintf in
> >> > fbtft_register_framebuffer() to prevent potential buffer overflow.
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: rat1bor <enchantedredhunter@gmail.com>
>
> Another thing, use your real name and not an alias.
>
> >> Does this change address any compiler warning or something like that?
> >> At a glance I do not see any usefulness of this patch except an
> >> unneeded churn.
>
> --
> With Best Regards,
> Andy Shevchenko
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2495 bytes --]