[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1335975202.2324.12.camel@groeck-laptop>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 09:13:22 -0700
From: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@...csson.com>
To: Joe Korty <joe.korty@...r.com>
CC: Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: checkpatch: kstrtol fix
On Wed, 2012-05-02 at 11:10 -0400, Joe Korty wrote:
> kstrtol is a substitute for simple_strtol() only when when second
> arg of simple_strtol() is NULL. For any other value the functionality
> of simple_strtol() cannot be implemented in terms of kstrtol.
>
> So modify checkpatch.pl so that it prints out the following warning only
> if the second argument is null:
>
> WARNING: simple_strtol is obsolete, use kstrtol instead
>
> Signed-off-by: Joe Korty <joe.korty@...r.com>
>
I think this would be a bad idea. Most if not all instances in the
kernel (at least all the ones I looked at) use the second argument to
determine if the parameter was actually a number or not, ie it is used
to detect parameter errors. This is exactly the point of using kstrtol()
in the first place. So it _is_ possible, at least in most cases, to
implement the same functionality with kstrtol(). If there _are_ uses of
simple_strtol() where the second argument is not used for error checking
but for some other purpose, I am sure that an alternative solution can
be found which does not require simple_strtol(). Or just live with the
warning for those cases.
Thanks,
Guenter
--
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