[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAAH8bW-ExkJeAh641Fhg-PxCv7M3aiAP2ZYMuzTzUBJ=O7xSJw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2015 16:39:01 +0300
From: Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>
To: Pan Xinhui <xinhuix.pan@...el.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>, tj@...nel.org,
peterz@...radead.org, sudeep.holla@....com, mina86@...a86.com,
"mnipxh@....com" <mnipxh@....com>,
Alexey Klimov <klimov.linux@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib/bitmap.c: return -EINVAL for grouping errors in __bitmap_parselist
> Sometimes the input from user may cause an unexpected result.
Could you please provide specific example?
>
> just like __bitmap_parse, we return -EINVAL if there is no avaiable digit in each
> parsing procedures.
>
> Signed-off-by: Pan Xinhui <xinhuix.pan@...el.com>
Hello, Pan.
(Adding Alexey Klimov, Rasmus Villemoes)
> ---
> lib/bitmap.c | 7 +++++--
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/bitmap.c b/lib/bitmap.c
> index 64c0926..995fca2 100644
> --- a/lib/bitmap.c
> +++ b/lib/bitmap.c
> @@ -504,7 +504,7 @@ static int __bitmap_parselist(const char *buf, unsigned int buflen,
> int nmaskbits)
> {
> unsigned a, b;
> - int c, old_c, totaldigits;
> + int c, old_c, totaldigits, ndigits;
> const char __user __force *ubuf = (const char __user __force *)buf;
> int exp_digit, in_range;
>
> @@ -514,6 +514,7 @@ static int __bitmap_parselist(const char *buf, unsigned int buflen,
> exp_digit = 1;
> in_range = 0;
> a = b = 0;
> + ndigits = 0;
>
> /* Get the next cpu# or a range of cpu#'s */
> while (buflen) {
> @@ -555,8 +556,10 @@ static int __bitmap_parselist(const char *buf, unsigned int buflen,
> if (!in_range)
> a = b;
> exp_digit = 0;
> - totaldigits++;
> + ndigits++; totaldigits++;
I'm not happy with joining two statements to a single line.
Maybe sometimes it's OK for loop iterators like
while (a[i][j]) {
i++; j++;
}
But here it looks nasty. Anyway, it's minor.
> }
> + if (ndigits == 0)
> + return -EINVAL;
You can avoid in-loop incrementation of ndigits if you'll
save current totaldigits to ndigits before loop, and check
ndigits against totaldigits after the loop:
ndigits = totaldigits;
while (...) {
...
totaldigits++;
}
if (ndigits == totaldigits)
return -EINVAL;
Maybe it's a good point to rework initial __bitmap_parse() similar way...
> if (!(a <= b))
> return -EINVAL;
> if (b >= nmaskbits)
> --
> 1.9.1
--
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