Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] atm: solos-pci: Replace simple_strtol by kstrtoint
On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 06:26:31AM -0500, Charles (Chas) Williams wrote: > On Thu, 2015-12-03 at 09:06 +0100, LABBE Corentin wrote: > > @@ -357,11 +357,11 @@ static int process_status(struct solos_card *card, > > int port, struct sk_buff *skb > > if (!str) > > return -EIO; > > > > - ver = simple_strtol(str, NULL, 10); > > - if (ver < 1) { > > + err = kstrtoint(str, 10, ); > > + if (err || ver < 1) { > > dev_warn(>dev->dev, "Unexpected status interrupt version > > %d\n", > > ver); > > - return -EIO; > > + return err; > > > If ver < 1 then you might return a 0 here. Always returning -EIO is > probably just fine. > Hello I think the best solution is to split the test, since returning error code from kstrtoint was asked by David Miller. if (err) return err; if (ver < 1) return -EIO; Thanks Regards -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] atm: solos-pci: Replace simple_strtol by kstrtoint
On Thu, 2015-12-03 at 09:06 +0100, LABBE Corentin wrote: > @@ -357,11 +357,11 @@ static int process_status(struct solos_card *card, int > port, struct sk_buff *skb > if (!str) > return -EIO; > > - ver = simple_strtol(str, NULL, 10); > - if (ver < 1) { > + err = kstrtoint(str, 10, ); > + if (err || ver < 1) { > dev_warn(>dev->dev, "Unexpected status interrupt version > %d\n", >ver); > - return -EIO; > + return err; If ver < 1 then you might return a 0 here. Always returning -EIO is probably just fine. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] atm: solos-pci: Replace simple_strtol by kstrtoint
On Thu, 2015-12-03 at 13:58 +0100, LABBE Corentin wrote: > On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 06:26:31AM -0500, Charles (Chas) Williams wrote: > > On Thu, 2015-12-03 at 09:06 +0100, LABBE Corentin wrote: > > > @@ -357,11 +357,11 @@ static int process_status(struct solos_card *card, > > > int port, struct sk_buff *skb > > > if (!str) > > > return -EIO; > > > > > > - ver = simple_strtol(str, NULL, 10); > > > - if (ver < 1) { > > > + err = kstrtoint(str, 10, ); > > > + if (err || ver < 1) { > > > dev_warn(>dev->dev, "Unexpected status interrupt version > > > %d\n", > > >ver); > > > - return -EIO; > > > + return err; > > > > > > If ver < 1 then you might return a 0 here. Always returning -EIO is > > probably just fine. > > > > Hello > > I think the best solution is to split the test, since returning error code > from kstrtoint was asked by David Miller. > if (err) > return err; > if (ver < 1) > return -EIO; > Thanks > Regards That's fine. You just shouldn't return 0 if the ver < 1. This isn't timing critical code. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html