Re: [PATCH -mm] Introduce strtol_check_range()
On Fri, Aug 03, 2007 at 02:29:06PM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote: > On Fri, 3 Aug 2007, Jan Engelhardt wrote: > > > > > On Aug 2 2007 05:16, Satyam Sharma wrote: > > > > > >BSD's strtonum(3) is a detestful, horrible shame. > > > > > >The strtol_check_range() I implemented here does _all_ that strtonum() > > >does, plus is generic w.r.t. base, and minus the tasteless "errstr" > > >argument. > > > > > >Tell me, how does that "errstr" ever make sense? We _anyway_ return > > >errors (-EINVAL or -ERANGE) if any of those cases show up. > > > > errstr (well, at least for strtol) are useful to find the first character > > that > > does not make up a number (and then do whatever the user wants to, > > including, > > continuing to parse). For example "chown 0:1337", strtol on "0:1337" should > > give errstr=pointer to the ":", then check for it being a ':', then you know > > the next char is the GID. :) > > We were actually discussing the "errstr" that's the fourth argument of > BSD's strtonum(3) which has quite radically different semantics [1] > from the "endptr" argument of strtol(3). Glad you've noticed. > Anyway, I originally > misunderstood the interface / the correct way to be using that function > as I later mentioned in the other mail -- also see the answer to point > #3 in [2]. Porting it over to here does sound like a good idea. > [1] > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=strtonum=0=3=FreeBSD+7-current=html > [2] http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2005-April/048744.html Actually, strtonum() rejects "42\n" which means we can't massively use it. :-( - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH -mm] Introduce strtol_check_range()
On Fri, Aug 03, 2007 at 02:29:06PM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote: On Fri, 3 Aug 2007, Jan Engelhardt wrote: On Aug 2 2007 05:16, Satyam Sharma wrote: BSD's strtonum(3) is a detestful, horrible shame. The strtol_check_range() I implemented here does _all_ that strtonum() does, plus is generic w.r.t. base, and minus the tasteless errstr argument. Tell me, how does that errstr ever make sense? We _anyway_ return errors (-EINVAL or -ERANGE) if any of those cases show up. errstr (well, at least for strtol) are useful to find the first character that does not make up a number (and then do whatever the user wants to, including, continuing to parse). For example chown 0:1337, strtol on 0:1337 should give errstr=pointer to the :, then check for it being a ':', then you know the next char is the GID. :) We were actually discussing the errstr that's the fourth argument of BSD's strtonum(3) which has quite radically different semantics [1] from the endptr argument of strtol(3). Glad you've noticed. Anyway, I originally misunderstood the interface / the correct way to be using that function as I later mentioned in the other mail -- also see the answer to point #3 in [2]. Porting it over to here does sound like a good idea. [1] http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=strtonumapropos=0sektion=3manpath=FreeBSD+7-currentformat=html [2] http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2005-April/048744.html Actually, strtonum() rejects 42\n which means we can't massively use it. :-( - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH -mm] Introduce strtol_check_range()
Hi Jan, On Fri, 3 Aug 2007, Jan Engelhardt wrote: > > On Aug 2 2007 05:16, Satyam Sharma wrote: > > > >BSD's strtonum(3) is a detestful, horrible shame. > > > >The strtol_check_range() I implemented here does _all_ that strtonum() > >does, plus is generic w.r.t. base, and minus the tasteless "errstr" > >argument. > > > >Tell me, how does that "errstr" ever make sense? We _anyway_ return > >errors (-EINVAL or -ERANGE) if any of those cases show up. > > errstr (well, at least for strtol) are useful to find the first character that > does not make up a number (and then do whatever the user wants to, including, > continuing to parse). For example "chown 0:1337", strtol on "0:1337" should > give errstr=pointer to the ":", then check for it being a ':', then you know > the next char is the GID. :) We were actually discussing the "errstr" that's the fourth argument of BSD's strtonum(3) which has quite radically different semantics [1] from the "endptr" argument of strtol(3). Anyway, I originally misunderstood the interface / the correct way to be using that function as I later mentioned in the other mail -- also see the answer to point #3 in [2]. Porting it over to here does sound like a good idea. I'm off on vacation with little or intermittent (possibly none) access to email for the next 10 days, so please feel free to beat me to it :-) Satyam [1] http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=strtonum=0=3=FreeBSD+7-current=html [2] http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2005-April/048744.html - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH -mm] Introduce strtol_check_range()
On Aug 2 2007 05:16, Satyam Sharma wrote: > >BSD's strtonum(3) is a detestful, horrible shame. > >The strtol_check_range() I implemented here does _all_ that strtonum() >does, plus is generic w.r.t. base, and minus the tasteless "errstr" >argument. > >Tell me, how does that "errstr" ever make sense? We _anyway_ return >errors (-EINVAL or -ERANGE) if any of those cases show up. errstr (well, at least for strtol) are useful to find the first character that does not make up a number (and then do whatever the user wants to, including, continuing to parse). For example "chown 0:1337", strtol on "0:1337" should give errstr=pointer to the ":", then check for it being a ':', then you know the next char is the GID. :) Jan -- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH -mm] Introduce strtol_check_range()
On Aug 2 2007 05:16, Satyam Sharma wrote: BSD's strtonum(3) is a detestful, horrible shame. The strtol_check_range() I implemented here does _all_ that strtonum() does, plus is generic w.r.t. base, and minus the tasteless errstr argument. Tell me, how does that errstr ever make sense? We _anyway_ return errors (-EINVAL or -ERANGE) if any of those cases show up. errstr (well, at least for strtol) are useful to find the first character that does not make up a number (and then do whatever the user wants to, including, continuing to parse). For example chown 0:1337, strtol on 0:1337 should give errstr=pointer to the :, then check for it being a ':', then you know the next char is the GID. :) Jan -- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH -mm] Introduce strtol_check_range()
Hi Jan, On Fri, 3 Aug 2007, Jan Engelhardt wrote: On Aug 2 2007 05:16, Satyam Sharma wrote: BSD's strtonum(3) is a detestful, horrible shame. The strtol_check_range() I implemented here does _all_ that strtonum() does, plus is generic w.r.t. base, and minus the tasteless errstr argument. Tell me, how does that errstr ever make sense? We _anyway_ return errors (-EINVAL or -ERANGE) if any of those cases show up. errstr (well, at least for strtol) are useful to find the first character that does not make up a number (and then do whatever the user wants to, including, continuing to parse). For example chown 0:1337, strtol on 0:1337 should give errstr=pointer to the :, then check for it being a ':', then you know the next char is the GID. :) We were actually discussing the errstr that's the fourth argument of BSD's strtonum(3) which has quite radically different semantics [1] from the endptr argument of strtol(3). Anyway, I originally misunderstood the interface / the correct way to be using that function as I later mentioned in the other mail -- also see the answer to point #3 in [2]. Porting it over to here does sound like a good idea. I'm off on vacation with little or intermittent (possibly none) access to email for the next 10 days, so please feel free to beat me to it :-) Satyam [1] http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=strtonumapropos=0sektion=3manpath=FreeBSD+7-currentformat=html [2] http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2005-April/048744.html - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH -mm] Introduce strtol_check_range()
On 8/2/07, Alexey Dobriyan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Please, copy strtonum() from BSD instead. Nobody needs another
> > > home-grown converter.
> >
> > BSD's strtonum(3) is a detestful, horrible shame.
> >
> > The strtol_check_range() I implemented here does _all_ that strtonum()
> > does, plus is generic w.r.t. base,
>
> What you did with base argument is creating opportunity to fsckup,
> namely, forgetting that base is last and putting it second.
Embedding base in function name (func10, func8, func16 [, func2])
will eliminate that possibility and also save one argument
push on stack.
You can always multiplex them locally:
static int func_generic(base...) {...}
int func10(...) { return func_generic(10, ); }
int func8(...) { return func_generic(8, ); }
You also can have a faster "static int func_power_of_2(base...)" for
2,8,16, etc.
--
vda
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH -mm] Introduce strtol_check_range()
On 8/2/07, Alexey Dobriyan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please, copy strtonum() from BSD instead. Nobody needs another
home-grown converter.
BSD's strtonum(3) is a detestful, horrible shame.
The strtol_check_range() I implemented here does _all_ that strtonum()
does, plus is generic w.r.t. base,
What you did with base argument is creating opportunity to fsckup,
namely, forgetting that base is last and putting it second.
Embedding base in function name (func10, func8, func16 [, func2])
will eliminate that possibility and also save one argument
push on stack.
You can always multiplex them locally:
static int func_generic(base...) {...}
int func10(...) { return func_generic(10, ); }
int func8(...) { return func_generic(8, ); }
You also can have a faster static int func_power_of_2(base...) for
2,8,16, etc.
--
vda
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH -mm] Introduce strtol_check_range()
On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 05:16:59AM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Aug 2007, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 10:04:10PM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:
> > > Callers (especially "store" functions for sysfs or configfs attributes)
> > > that want to convert an input string to a number may often also want to
> > > check for simple input sanity or allowable range. strtol10_check_range()
> > > of netconsole does this, so extract it out into lib/vsprintf.c, make it
> > > generic w.r.t. base, and export it to the rest of the kernel and modules.
> >
> > > --- a/drivers/net/netconsole.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/net/netconsole.c
> > > @@ -335,9 +307,11 @@ static ssize_t store_enabled(struct
> > > netconsole_target *nt,
> > > int err;
> > > long enabled;
> > >
> > > - enabled = strtol10_check_range(buf, 0, 1);
> > > - if (enabled < 0)
> > > + enabled = strtol_check_range(buf, 0, 1, 10);
> > > + if (enabled < 0) {
> > > + printk(KERN_ERR "netconsole: invalid input\n");
> > > return enabled;
> > > + }
> >
> > Please, copy strtonum() from BSD instead. Nobody needs another
> > home-grown converter.
>
> BSD's strtonum(3) is a detestful, horrible shame.
>
> The strtol_check_range() I implemented here does _all_ that strtonum()
> does, plus is generic w.r.t. base,
What you did with base argument is creating opportunity to fsckup,
namely, forgetting that base is last and putting it second.
> and minus the tasteless "errstr"
> argument.
>
> Tell me, how does that "errstr" ever make sense? We _anyway_ return
> errors (-EINVAL or -ERANGE) if any of those cases show up. And
> _because_ we use negative numbers to return errors, we can't use this
> function to convert negative inputs anyway ... an appropriate error
> message can always be outputted by the caller itself. [ hence the
> two WARN_ON's I added here ]
>
> But yeah, considering this implementation is so similar to strtonum(3)
> (minus the shortcomings, that is :-) we can probably rename it to
> something like kstrtonum() ...
> and we should probably be returning
> different errors for the two invalid conditions, yes.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH -mm] Introduce strtol_check_range()
On Thu, 2 Aug 2007, Satyam Sharma wrote: > On Wed, 1 Aug 2007, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 10:04:10PM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote: > > > Callers (especially "store" functions for sysfs or configfs attributes) > > > that want to convert an input string to a number may often also want to > > > check for simple input sanity or allowable range. strtol10_check_range() > > > of netconsole does this, so extract it out into lib/vsprintf.c, make it > > > generic w.r.t. base, and export it to the rest of the kernel and modules. > > [...] > > > > Please, copy strtonum() from BSD instead. Nobody needs another > > home-grown converter. > > BSD's strtonum(3) is a detestful, horrible shame. > > The strtol_check_range() I implemented here does _all_ that strtonum() > does, plus is generic w.r.t. base, and minus the tasteless "errstr" > argument. > > Tell me, how does that "errstr" ever make sense? We _anyway_ return > errors (-EINVAL or -ERANGE) if any of those cases show up. And > _because_ we use negative numbers to return errors, we can't use this > function to convert negative inputs anyway ... an appropriate error > message can always be outputted by the caller itself. [ hence the > two WARN_ON's I added here ] Glargh, lemme take that back :-p Wait, it takes in an const char ** argument, and then the whole error return checking is based on the (const char *) *arg, and not the return value (-EINVAL, -ERANGE) itself. And it appears, we set the const char **errstr from inside the function only if the caller didn't explicitly give us a NULL itself ... hmm, it all does make sense, plus allows to convert negative inputs as well -- now that the error return checking in the callsite won't be based on the return value anyway (but strtonum(3) is still a bit daft, in that it "pretends" to return error values in ret even though the caller can't use that to test if an error actually occurred). [ Thankfully there won't be any BSD lovers around here, so probably I'll be able to get out of this clean :-) So okay, I'll port it over ... ] Thanks, Satyam - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH -mm] Introduce strtol_check_range()
Hi Alexey,
On Wed, 1 Aug 2007, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 10:04:10PM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:
> > Callers (especially "store" functions for sysfs or configfs attributes)
> > that want to convert an input string to a number may often also want to
> > check for simple input sanity or allowable range. strtol10_check_range()
> > of netconsole does this, so extract it out into lib/vsprintf.c, make it
> > generic w.r.t. base, and export it to the rest of the kernel and modules.
>
> > --- a/drivers/net/netconsole.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/netconsole.c
> > @@ -335,9 +307,11 @@ static ssize_t store_enabled(struct netconsole_target
> > *nt,
> > int err;
> > long enabled;
> >
> > - enabled = strtol10_check_range(buf, 0, 1);
> > - if (enabled < 0)
> > + enabled = strtol_check_range(buf, 0, 1, 10);
> > + if (enabled < 0) {
> > + printk(KERN_ERR "netconsole: invalid input\n");
> > return enabled;
> > + }
>
> Please, copy strtonum() from BSD instead. Nobody needs another
> home-grown converter.
BSD's strtonum(3) is a detestful, horrible shame.
The strtol_check_range() I implemented here does _all_ that strtonum()
does, plus is generic w.r.t. base, and minus the tasteless "errstr"
argument.
Tell me, how does that "errstr" ever make sense? We _anyway_ return
errors (-EINVAL or -ERANGE) if any of those cases show up. And
_because_ we use negative numbers to return errors, we can't use this
function to convert negative inputs anyway ... an appropriate error
message can always be outputted by the caller itself. [ hence the
two WARN_ON's I added here ]
But yeah, considering this implementation is so similar to strtonum(3)
(minus the shortcomings, that is :-) we can probably rename it to
something like kstrtonum() ... and we should probably be returning
different errors for the two invalid conditions, yes.
Thanks,
Satyam
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH -mm] Introduce strtol_check_range()
Hi Alexey,
On Wed, 1 Aug 2007, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 10:04:10PM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:
Callers (especially store functions for sysfs or configfs attributes)
that want to convert an input string to a number may often also want to
check for simple input sanity or allowable range. strtol10_check_range()
of netconsole does this, so extract it out into lib/vsprintf.c, make it
generic w.r.t. base, and export it to the rest of the kernel and modules.
--- a/drivers/net/netconsole.c
+++ b/drivers/net/netconsole.c
@@ -335,9 +307,11 @@ static ssize_t store_enabled(struct netconsole_target
*nt,
int err;
long enabled;
- enabled = strtol10_check_range(buf, 0, 1);
- if (enabled 0)
+ enabled = strtol_check_range(buf, 0, 1, 10);
+ if (enabled 0) {
+ printk(KERN_ERR netconsole: invalid input\n);
return enabled;
+ }
Please, copy strtonum() from BSD instead. Nobody needs another
home-grown converter.
BSD's strtonum(3) is a detestful, horrible shame.
The strtol_check_range() I implemented here does _all_ that strtonum()
does, plus is generic w.r.t. base, and minus the tasteless errstr
argument.
Tell me, how does that errstr ever make sense? We _anyway_ return
errors (-EINVAL or -ERANGE) if any of those cases show up. And
_because_ we use negative numbers to return errors, we can't use this
function to convert negative inputs anyway ... an appropriate error
message can always be outputted by the caller itself. [ hence the
two WARN_ON's I added here ]
But yeah, considering this implementation is so similar to strtonum(3)
(minus the shortcomings, that is :-) we can probably rename it to
something like kstrtonum() ... and we should probably be returning
different errors for the two invalid conditions, yes.
Thanks,
Satyam
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH -mm] Introduce strtol_check_range()
On Thu, 2 Aug 2007, Satyam Sharma wrote: On Wed, 1 Aug 2007, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 10:04:10PM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote: Callers (especially store functions for sysfs or configfs attributes) that want to convert an input string to a number may often also want to check for simple input sanity or allowable range. strtol10_check_range() of netconsole does this, so extract it out into lib/vsprintf.c, make it generic w.r.t. base, and export it to the rest of the kernel and modules. [...] Please, copy strtonum() from BSD instead. Nobody needs another home-grown converter. BSD's strtonum(3) is a detestful, horrible shame. The strtol_check_range() I implemented here does _all_ that strtonum() does, plus is generic w.r.t. base, and minus the tasteless errstr argument. Tell me, how does that errstr ever make sense? We _anyway_ return errors (-EINVAL or -ERANGE) if any of those cases show up. And _because_ we use negative numbers to return errors, we can't use this function to convert negative inputs anyway ... an appropriate error message can always be outputted by the caller itself. [ hence the two WARN_ON's I added here ] Glargh, lemme take that back :-p Wait, it takes in an const char ** argument, and then the whole error return checking is based on the (const char *) *arg, and not the return value (-EINVAL, -ERANGE) itself. And it appears, we set the const char **errstr from inside the function only if the caller didn't explicitly give us a NULL itself ... hmm, it all does make sense, plus allows to convert negative inputs as well -- now that the error return checking in the callsite won't be based on the return value anyway (but strtonum(3) is still a bit daft, in that it pretends to return error values in ret even though the caller can't use that to test if an error actually occurred). [ Thankfully there won't be any BSD lovers around here, so probably I'll be able to get out of this clean :-) So okay, I'll port it over ... ] Thanks, Satyam - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH -mm] Introduce strtol_check_range()
On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 05:16:59AM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:
On Wed, 1 Aug 2007, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 10:04:10PM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:
Callers (especially store functions for sysfs or configfs attributes)
that want to convert an input string to a number may often also want to
check for simple input sanity or allowable range. strtol10_check_range()
of netconsole does this, so extract it out into lib/vsprintf.c, make it
generic w.r.t. base, and export it to the rest of the kernel and modules.
--- a/drivers/net/netconsole.c
+++ b/drivers/net/netconsole.c
@@ -335,9 +307,11 @@ static ssize_t store_enabled(struct
netconsole_target *nt,
int err;
long enabled;
- enabled = strtol10_check_range(buf, 0, 1);
- if (enabled 0)
+ enabled = strtol_check_range(buf, 0, 1, 10);
+ if (enabled 0) {
+ printk(KERN_ERR netconsole: invalid input\n);
return enabled;
+ }
Please, copy strtonum() from BSD instead. Nobody needs another
home-grown converter.
BSD's strtonum(3) is a detestful, horrible shame.
The strtol_check_range() I implemented here does _all_ that strtonum()
does, plus is generic w.r.t. base,
What you did with base argument is creating opportunity to fsckup,
namely, forgetting that base is last and putting it second.
and minus the tasteless errstr
argument.
Tell me, how does that errstr ever make sense? We _anyway_ return
errors (-EINVAL or -ERANGE) if any of those cases show up. And
_because_ we use negative numbers to return errors, we can't use this
function to convert negative inputs anyway ... an appropriate error
message can always be outputted by the caller itself. [ hence the
two WARN_ON's I added here ]
But yeah, considering this implementation is so similar to strtonum(3)
(minus the shortcomings, that is :-) we can probably rename it to
something like kstrtonum() ...
and we should probably be returning
different errors for the two invalid conditions, yes.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH -mm] Introduce strtol_check_range()
On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 10:04:10PM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:
> Callers (especially "store" functions for sysfs or configfs attributes)
> that want to convert an input string to a number may often also want to
> check for simple input sanity or allowable range. strtol10_check_range()
> of netconsole does this, so extract it out into lib/vsprintf.c, make it
> generic w.r.t. base, and export it to the rest of the kernel and modules.
> --- a/drivers/net/netconsole.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/netconsole.c
> @@ -335,9 +307,11 @@ static ssize_t store_enabled(struct netconsole_target
> *nt,
> int err;
> long enabled;
>
> - enabled = strtol10_check_range(buf, 0, 1);
> - if (enabled < 0)
> + enabled = strtol_check_range(buf, 0, 1, 10);
> + if (enabled < 0) {
> + printk(KERN_ERR "netconsole: invalid input\n");
> return enabled;
> + }
Please, copy strtonum() from BSD instead. Nobody needs another
home-grown converter.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH -mm] Introduce strtol_check_range()
On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 22:04:10 +0530 (IST) Satyam Sharma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [ checkpatch.pl doesn't particularly like this patch, but I wanted to be > consistent with the rest of lib/vsprintf.c and include/linux/kernel.h. ] I tend to think that it isn't worth being consistent with wrong stuff - it's just more things for people to fix up one day. Yes, you introduce a mixture of right and wrong, but that makes the wrong stand out more ;) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH -mm] Introduce strtol_check_range()
On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 22:04:10 +0530 (IST) Satyam Sharma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [ checkpatch.pl doesn't particularly like this patch, but I wanted to be consistent with the rest of lib/vsprintf.c and include/linux/kernel.h. ] I tend to think that it isn't worth being consistent with wrong stuff - it's just more things for people to fix up one day. Yes, you introduce a mixture of right and wrong, but that makes the wrong stand out more ;) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH -mm] Introduce strtol_check_range()
On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 10:04:10PM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:
Callers (especially store functions for sysfs or configfs attributes)
that want to convert an input string to a number may often also want to
check for simple input sanity or allowable range. strtol10_check_range()
of netconsole does this, so extract it out into lib/vsprintf.c, make it
generic w.r.t. base, and export it to the rest of the kernel and modules.
--- a/drivers/net/netconsole.c
+++ b/drivers/net/netconsole.c
@@ -335,9 +307,11 @@ static ssize_t store_enabled(struct netconsole_target
*nt,
int err;
long enabled;
- enabled = strtol10_check_range(buf, 0, 1);
- if (enabled 0)
+ enabled = strtol_check_range(buf, 0, 1, 10);
+ if (enabled 0) {
+ printk(KERN_ERR netconsole: invalid input\n);
return enabled;
+ }
Please, copy strtonum() from BSD instead. Nobody needs another
home-grown converter.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
