This kind of memcpy() is error-prone. Its replacement with a struct
assignment is prefered because it's type-safe and much easier to read.
Found by coccinelle. Hand patched and reviewed.
Tested by compilation only.
A simplified version of the semantic match that finds this problem is as
follows: (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
// <smpl>
@@
identifier struct_name;
struct struct_name to;
struct struct_name from;
expression E;
@@
-memcpy(&(to), &(from), E);
+to = from;
// </smpl>
Signed-off-by: Peter Senna Tschudin <peter.senna@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Ezequiel Garcia <elezegarcia@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@redhat.com>
strlcpy(btv->c.i2c_adap.name, "bttv",
sizeof(btv->c.i2c_adap.name));
- memcpy(&btv->i2c_algo, &bttv_i2c_algo_bit_template,
- sizeof(bttv_i2c_algo_bit_template));
+ btv->i2c_algo = bttv_i2c_algo_bit_template;
btv->i2c_algo.udelay = i2c_udelay;
btv->i2c_algo.data = btv;
btv->c.i2c_adap.algo_data = &btv->i2c_algo;