linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH 2/3] ext4: Use kstrtoul() instead of deprecated simple

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20130311153801.GB4646@thunk.org>
Date:	Mon, 11 Mar 2013 11:38:01 -0400
From:	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To:	Lukáš Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] ext4: Use kstrtoul() instead of deprecated
 simple_strtoul()

On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 08:36:16AM +0100, Lukáš Czerner wrote:
> I think that parse_strtoul() is still useful to have because we
> check the "max" value as well and return -EINVAL if it is exceeded.
> Removing it we would have to add the check to the callers
> where we're using is now, which seems unnecessary, especially since
> we might expect more users of the helper.

Well, at the moment only one of the two users of parse_strtoul() is
using the "max" value check feature.  I see one other potential user
of parse_strtoul (there's one use of simple_strtoul in get_sb_block()
which wasn't converted in your patch), but it wouldn't need the max
value check feature either.

So I don't have a super strong feeling about this, since this isn't
performance critical code, and it's probably not going to cost a large
amount of object code or stack space, but sometimes extra levels of
abstraction end up hurting more than they help.

Regards,

					- Ted
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html