linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 19/24] dyndbg: accept query terms like module:foo and file=bar

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

Date:   Wed, 17 Jun 2020 14:11:58 +0200
From:   Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
To:     jim.cromie@...il.com
Cc:     Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, akpm@...uxfoundation.org,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 19/24] dyndbg: accept query terms like module:foo and
 file=bar

On Tue 2020-06-16 14:08:57, jim.cromie@...il.com wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 5:57 AM Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat 2020-06-13 09:57:33, Jim Cromie wrote:
> > > Current code expects "keyword" "arg" as 2 space separated words.
> > > Change to also accept "keyword:arg" and "keyword=arg" forms as well,
> > > and drop !(nwords%2) requirement.
> > >
> > > Then in rest of function, use new keyword,arg variables instead of
> > > word[i],word[i+1]
> >
> > I like the idea. But please allow only one form. IMHO, parameter=value
> > is a common way to pass values to commandline parameters.
> >
> 
> I dont see a basis to prefer one over the other.
> we already now accept  " file   foo.c:func "
> that might argue for file=foo:func
> but file:foo:func is what youd expect reading left-to-right
> 
> > Note that "keyword" and "arg" is strange naming, especially "arg".
> >
> 
> I think keyword is clear in context. query_term is suitable, but no better.
> 
> arg is pretty generic, without overloaded meaning like value ( like
> lvalue ? rvalue ?)
> almost as old as 'i', but generally a string (not an int)
> Is there an alternative you favor ?

You made to do some research and I was wrong. For example, getopt()
operates with options and their arguments. So, 'keyword' and 'arg' names
look good after all.

Well, I still think that only one syntax should be supported. And it
is better to distinguish keywords and arguments, so I prefer keyword=arg.

I see "filename:func" or "filename:line" as a compound parameter. People are
familiar with this syntax, for example, from gdb.

But using '=' is very common for first level delimiter: getopt,
qemu.

Well, I do not have strong opinion on this.

Best Regards,
Petr