Re: ddm questions

On 2003-10-25 at 10:25:01 [+0200], you wrote:
> > > > Yep, the non-const was chosen intentionally. I had the feeling, that
> > > > e.g.
> > > > truncating a name wouldn't be too unusual.
> > > 
> > > So do you not want me to return B_NAME_TOO_LONG if the name is larger 
> > > than
> > > B_OS_NAME_LENGTH and instead let the validate function handle things?
> > 
> > That's what I was trying to say. :-) The string is passed to the disk
> > system,
> > which will truncate the name, if necessary, and the syscall just needs to
> > copy it back into userland space.
> 
> Are you okay with truncating it when copying from userland at the start of
> the respective _kern_XYZ() function (but not returning an error if 
> truncation
> occurs)? This is what I've done for the moment, as it seems more efficient
> than arbitrarily allocating and copying the entire string and then forcing
> the validate function to truncate it.

Ah, OK, sure, I misread you. It makes sense to enforce the B_OS_NAME_LENGTH 
limit already in the respective validate syscall. The disk system will 
truncate the name further though, if it has more restrictive constraints.

BTW, do you think B_OS_NAME_LENGTH (32 chars) is sufficient for partition 
(content) names? Since we don't use fixed size arrays in any structures, it 
would do any harm memory-wise to allow longer names. Oh, as I just realized 
fs_info reserves B_FILE_NAME_LENGTH space for the volume name. So we should 
probably use that limit too.

CU, Ingo