On Thu, Jun 18, 2026 at 05:14:19PM +0100, Rodrigo Alencar wrote: > On 18/06/26 16:06, Nuno Sá wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 18, 2026 at 02:27:22PM +0100, Rodrigo Alencar via B4 Relay > > wrote:
... > > > + dev_attr->attr.name = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "%s%s", prefix, postfix); > > > + if (!dev_attr->attr.name) > > > return -ENOMEM; > > > > I don't oppose the change. Looks like a nice cleanup. May I oppose it? I found use scnprintf() is harder to follow in comparison to nice kasprintf() that takes care for the dynamically allocated buffer. Also there is a chance to get a name silently cut due to insufficient space. Besides that this function can't be used (again due to 'c') in kasprintf()-like wrapper. I do not consider this as a good approach. Have you looked at seq_buf instead? > > But bear in mind this very sensible as any subtle mistake means ABI > > breakage. Which immediately raises a question of test coverage. Do we have one? If not, this code must be accompanied with one. > Yes! I tried to be careful... this is dangerous stuff! -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
