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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2009 13:10:48 -0600 From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...e.de> To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] strstrip incorrectly marked __must_check On Tue, 2009-11-03 at 10:59 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 12:38:08 -0600 > James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...e.de> wrote: > > > strstrip strips whitespace from the beginning and end of a string. I > > agree you have to take the returned pointer if you want to strip from > > the beginning. However, if you wish to keep the whitespace at the > > beginning and only wish strstrip to remove it from the end, then it's > > entirely legitimate to discard the returned pointer. > > > > This is what we have in drivers/scsi/ipr.c and the patch to make > > strstrip __must_check is now causing SCSI spurious warnings in that > > code. > > > > Would prefer to keep the warning and to patch ipr.c, please. We found > I think three call sites which were incorrectly ignoring the strstrip() > return value and it's reasonable to fear that others will make the same > mistake in the future. What's the problem with the mistake ... additional leading whitespace? > And maybe ipr.c _should_ be patched. Right now it's assuming that the > string coming back from the device has no leading whitespace. Why trim > any possible trailing whitespace but not trim any possible leading > whitespace? I think it doesn't care. It wants to append an error code to the string, and to make it more visible it wants to strip trailing whitespace before doing so. > Or.. > > /* > * Comment goes here > */ > static inline void strsrip_tail(char *str) > { > char *x __used; > x = strstrip(str); > } Yes, I could go for that ... I just don't see such a problem with the currently overloaded uses of strstrip. James -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists